Vortex Razor HD Gen 3 1-10x24

[2Xalpha]

 

Vortex just released a 1-10 scope!

https://vortexoptics.com/riflescopes/vortex-razor-gen-iii-riflescopes/vortex-razor-hd-gen-iii-1-10x24-riflescope.html

 

They are not the first, though. IOR has a 1-10x26, and March has a 1-10x24. The IOR 1-10 is very heavy and has the uncommon dimension of a 35 mm tube. The March is said to be very nice, but comes with a side focus, which may indicate that short depth of field is an issue? (I've never seen through one).

At least it's interesting that Vortex came with a high end 1-10 before any of the major European manufacturers!

 

Vortex Razor HD Gen III 1-10x24

• 1-10x24 mm
• $2899.99 MSRP 
• 34 mm tube
• FIRST FOCAL PLANE (FFP) reticle
• Fixed parallax at 91 meters
• Weighs 609 grams

Freedom units version:
- EBR-9 (MRAD) Reticle (evenly spaced lines to suit different rifles/loads)
- 0.1 mrad clicks
- 10 mrad Travel Per Rotation 

Middle age version:
- EBR-9 BDC MOA Subtensions (unevenly spaced BDC reticle to suit certain loads, according to the manual 5.56 mm 55-77 grain boat tail bullets at 2700-3000 FPS , that is 3.6-5.0 grams bullets at 820-915 m/s for us freedom loving earthlings  )
- 1/4 MOA clicks
- 25 MOA Travel Per Rotation

Unfortunately there's no BDC turret and no zero stop.. Would have loved to see a Zeiss Rail option, but at least 34 mm mounts are not that uncommon. Will be interesting to hear how it performs compared to the Razor Gen 2, and the other big guys like Swarovski 1-8x24 and Zeiss 1-8x30. I guess the exit pupil will be small, probably around 2.6 mm at 10x. Also curious on the depth of field, as this can get pretty short on high zoom scopes.

 

Since the scope neither has a single turn turret nor a zero stop, it's probably not meant to be dialed during action (holdovers instead).

Edited January 8, 2020 by 2Xalpha

[021411]

Josh Tarrant did a quick unboxing/first look on his Instagram story. Glad to see they loosened up the zoom ring. 

Street pricing will be $1999.

[greatlakes08]

Looks like a pretty awesome scope. I would like to put it on an AR10. I think for 3-gun 10X would be too much magnification and to adjust out to six or eight on the fly would cause you to lose time vs going straight to max power with a throw lever and not having to look at the dial.

[Halo09]

15 minutes ago, greatlakes08 said:

Looks like a pretty awesome scope. I would like to put it on an AR10. I think for 3-gun 10X would be too much magnification and to adjust out to six or eight on the fly would cause you to lose time vs going straight to max power with a throw lever and not having to look at the dial.

Good news is...holdovers would stay the same, so as long as you know your dope, you could dial until you see the targets and go from there.  

[avastcosmicarena]

Does it have an illuminated center dot or only illuminated reticle? It appears to be more of a tactical style scope, competing more with the 1-8x nightforce options that are popular with military use than 3 gun scopes.

Definitely looks interesting though. I hope I don't regret my z8i purchase from earlier this year. haha

[Miggz55]

Looks like a pretty awesome scope. I would like to put it on an AR10. I think for 3-gun 10X would be too much magnification and to adjust out to six or eight on the fly would cause you to lose time vs going straight to max power with a throw lever and not having to look at the dial.

I’m thinking the same thing. Have a Gen2 1-6 on my 3gun rifle and it’s perfect. I don’t have much experience with FFP either... what’s the learning curve like and is it difficult to switch back and forth?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[adamge]

1 hour ago, Miggz55 said:

 

I’m thinking the same thing. Have a Gen2 1-6 on my 3gun rifle and it’s perfect. I don’t have much experience with FFP either... what’s the learning curve like and is it difficult to switch back and forth?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

After shooting FFP scopes for a while, you'll find yourself pretty weirded out by a SFP scope the first time you turn the zoom dial and the reticle stays fixed.

[mrd]

Field of view was not too great, an important factor for fast target aquisition. About the same FOV as the March 1-10x24, but the March is more than 2 oz lighter.  Vortex is a bit cheaper, though.

 

I'll stay with my Swaro Z8i 1-8x24.

[Miggz55]

 
After shooting FFP scopes for a while, you'll find yourself pretty weirded out by a SFP scope the first time you turn the zoom dial and the reticle stays fixed.

That’s exactly what I don’t want... I want the transition between rifles to remain natural.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[adamge]

12 minutes ago, Miggz55 said:

 

That’s exactly what I don’t want... I want the transition between rifles to remain natural.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

The pro solution there is to throw out all your SFP scopes and go full inventory FFP.

[Miggz55]

 
The pro solution there is to throw out all your SFP scopes and go full inventory FFP.

Right after I rob a bank [emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[greatlakes08]

6 hours ago, avastcosmicarena said:

Does it have an illuminated center dot or only illuminated reticle? It appears to be more of a tactical style scope, competing more with the 1-8x nightforce options that are popular with military use than 3 gun scopes.

Definitely looks interesting though. I hope I don't regret my z8i purchase from earlier this year. haha

I don’t think you will regret it at all. Better field of view and better glass on the swaro for sure. 

[avastcosmicarena]

4 hours ago, Miggz55 said:

 

I’m thinking the same thing. Have a Gen2 1-6 on my 3gun rifle and it’s perfect. I don’t have much experience with FFP either... what’s the learning curve like and is it difficult to switch back and forth?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

FFP is more popular with longer range shooting so that the reticle hold values are always accurate at any magnification. like longer range hunting and precision rifle scopes in 4-20x, 5-25 or 5-27x, 7-35x, etc....

You don't usually find FFP in lower power scopes outside of tactical/military style use.

Edited January 9, 2020 by avastcosmicarena

[avastcosmicarena]

Glad they went with 1/4 MOA clicks. Much better than 1/2 MOA for getting a really precise zero.

[2Xalpha]

On 1/8/2020 at 11:13 PM, mrd said:

Field of view was not too great, an important factor for fast target aquisition. About the same FOV as the March 1-10x24, but the March is more than 2 oz lighter.  Vortex is a bit cheaper, though.

 

It is not fair to compare the FOVs at their respective maximum magnifications. At 6x the field of view will be about the same on the Razor 1-10 Gen 3 as on the 1-6 Gen 2. Actually the Gen 3 has a slightly wider field of view.

 

A reason why the FOV of the Razor 1-10 is comparable to that on the March 1-10 is that objective lens diameter and magnification are important factors in field of view. There are also some things you can do with the ocular design, for example Swarovski have been known for squeezing out some extra field of view in their ocular designs.

 

Making a good FFP reticle on LPVOs is challenging because the reticle (and maybe especially the illumination) has a tendency to become very small and "disappear" at low magnification, but on the other side too big and obscuring the target at high magnification. A good reticle design captures the best of both worlds. That is why the illuminated part of the reticle has a segmented outer ring, so that the red dot is still visible and bright on low magnification, while the small center dot still allows for precise aiming at high magnification - at least in theory. I'm interested to see how it works in practice.

 

3 hours ago, avastcosmicarena said:

Glad they went with 1/4 MOA clicks. Much better than 1/2 MOA for getting a really precise zero.

 

And I'm so glad the mrad version still uses 0.1 mrad clicks! 0.2 mrad, as used on the Nightforce NX8 1-8x24 F1, gives me a f***ing headache.

 

Edited January 23, 2020 by 2Xalpha

[2Xalpha]

Given that the 1-10 performs comparable to a Razor 1-6 up to 6x, my big question is how usable it's going to be at 10x. Guess I have to handle it and see for myself.

 

Saw this video comparing the exit pupil of the 1-10x24 with other types of scopes.

His arguments are interesting, but I wanted to clarify some things.

Few PRS shooters use their scopes at max magnification (other than when milling). It is more common to use between 10-14x when shooting. Why? Mostly because the field of view shrinks with more magnification. Also, when you crank up the magnification lever the image becomes darker due to a smaller exit pupil. The smaller exit pupil also makes it more difficult to find the sight picture.

Say you have a use case where you want to use a given magnification, in this case 10x as seen on many traditional fixed magnification sharpshooting scopes. Now if you were to compare the exit pupil of a 5-25x50 set at 10x with a 1-10x24 scope on max power, you can not do so by comparing their minimum exit pupils! Two such scopes will have minimal exit pupils of 2 mm and 2.4 mm respectively, however at 10x the numbers will be 4 mm vs 2.4 mm! So the 1-10x24 will only have a 60% the exit pupil of a 5-25x50 when both are at 10x.

 

Why didn't Vortex go for a 30 mm objective lens like Zeiss did with their V8 1-8x30? One good thing by keeping the small objective lens is that it is easier to construct a scope with a good field of view, which is very important in our sport. However, Zeiss managed to get the same field of view (5.3 m at 100 m, or 3 degrees if you will, at 8x) as Swarovski did with their 1-8x24. Interested to hear what the compromise was. Shorter depth of field..?

Edited January 23, 2020 by 2Xalpha

[avastcosmicarena]

46 minutes ago, 2Xalpha said:

And I'm so glad the mrad version still uses 0.1 mrad clicks! 0.2 mrad, as used on the Nightforce NX8 1-8x24 F1, gives me a f***ing headache.

 

Agree with that too.

[mrd]

1 hour ago, 2Xalpha said:

It is not fair to compare the FOVs at their respective maximum magnifications. At 6x the field of view will be about the same on the Razor 1-10 Gen 3 as on the 1-6 Gen 2. Actually the Gen 3 has a slightly wider field of view.

 

A reason why the FOV of the Razor 1-10 is comparable to that on the March 1-10 is that objective lens diameter and magnification are important factors in field of view. There are also some things you can do with the ocular design, for example Swarovski have been known for squeezing out some extra field of view in their ocular designs.

 

I didn't. I compared the FOV on LOWEST magnification, since that is the only fair comparison. Also, at higher magnifications the FOV is just a factor of the FOV at 1x.

 

What I was saying is that the FOV of the Vortex 1-10x at 1x is not too great, compared to Swarovski z8i 1-8x or z6i 1-6i, Kahles 1-6x, Zeiss 1-6x or Ultimax 1-6x etc.  And I think a wide FOV and a big eye box are bigger factors for IPSC and 3-gun than 6x, 8x, or 10x max magnification, as fast target aquisition trumps zoom when it comes to scores.

 

That said, I'm going for the scope with the highest magnification without comprimising on FOV, which currently is 8x in Swarovski or Zeiss variety - Swaro having the advantage of better reticle (BRT). Looking forward to the day when 1-10x scopes comes with similar FOV as the z8i.