Vortex Razor HD LHT 4.5-22x50mm Q&A

[Ucsdryder]

@Ucsdryder not sure I follow your point here - are you trying to discredit this entire thread, drop test, or a dude? That would take something besides an anecdotal account I would think. I simply do not follow what you are trying to accomplish here?

I’m not sure either!!! I have zero issue with form, he’s obviously well versed in shooting and scopes. All I’ve ever done is try to explain my experience with the scope that 99% of people on this thread have discredited for no reason other than the results of one person who dropped one scope. I’m not a vortex lover, I have zeiss binos, kowa spotter, and 4 different scope manufacturers but the whole mob mentality gets old. I tried to offer up my real world experience and everytime I do I get jumped on since I didn’t drop it. Even form says “let’s meet up and drop it and I’ll buy you a new one”. He refuses to acknowledge 100s of miles of hiking, 1000s of miles of driving and all the abuse that goes along with that.

All that being said, I’ll bow out of this thread so you guys can go back to bashing vortex!

 

[Ucsdryder]

This is simply not true. There are those who complain about glass quality, bulky turrets, and availability. Except for that guy who did the goofy playground tracking test, I haven’t seen durability issues.

I have a couple, and while they aren’t a Nightforce, they function fine.

Glass quality - lht
Turrets - lht
Zero stop - lht
Locking turret - lht
Warranty - lht
Durability - supposedly swfa but form just said if drop them on their turret they break/bend.

Go to some other forms and search swfa. They aren’t NEARLY as popular as they Are on RS. Fact. Ok now I’m done. Carry on…

 

[Ucsdryder]

View attachment 502854

Haha I laughed out loud in the gym. Well played sir…

 

[nobody]

Glass quality - lht
Turrets - lht toss up (edge to SWFA in my experience)
Zero stop - lht
Locking turret - lht
Warranty - lht

I actually can agree with your ratings on 4 of these first 5 points on your list, with the exception of the Turret feel. I run nothing but SWFA now, and admit their turrets aren't as tactile as some other brands. But the turrets on the LHT are some of the absolute worst I've ever messed with, the epitome of mushy on every sample I've ever handled.

That said, I REALLY like the LHT's simple zero stop design, the glass is nice, I like the reticle in the 3-15 model (their HSR-5i), and obviously their warranty is second to none. I'll admit that I'm even a bit of a Vortex fanboy, all of my observation optics (UHD Binos, Viper 80mm Spotter, couple random pairs of Diamondbacks here and there), my Rangefinder (Viper 3000), and even my backpacking tripod is from Vortex. I use tons of their stuff and will put my UHD 10x50's up against any Alpha glass on the market (see, now people can pile on me too ). They got SO MUCH right with this scope, and if it worked I would have them on every single hunting rifle I own. But between this test, a few people I know having issues, and my own/my family's issues with their riflescopes over the years, no more in my safe.

But honestly, I largely agree with your assessment above. There is lots to like about the design on the LHT, I can objectively see why so many guys are interested in it. I'll never own one, but I can see (on paper) why they sell.

 

[Formidilosus]

tried to offer up my real world experience and everytime I do I get jumped on since I didn’t drop it. Even form says “let’s meet up and drop it and I’ll buy you a new one”. He refuses to acknowledge 100s of miles of hiking, 1000s of miles of driving and all the abuse that goes along with that.

The written word is a poor medium to actually decipher the context of what is being said. I absolutely acknowledge that you haven’t had an issue.
What I am saying is that short term, generally light use isn’t a much of a barometer of performance. There is a positive correlation between the scope eval and continued use during the full eval to likelihood of performance over years in normal use. That’s it. There’s nothing more behind what I am saying to you or anyone.

The reason I am willing to come to you and do the eval is because I want to see more samples to get more information- it isn’t to prove you wrong. If that LHT would have held zero just driving and general shooting I would have used it this year hunting- I tried with the Leupold Mark 5. However, neither held zero enough through general use, that would morally allow me to do so. No one wants scopes to work more than I- regardless of brand.

 

[freddyG]

I don’t understand the cult moniker. How is testing mechanical things, and posting your findings on forums come to be a cult?

To me it looks like those who are emotionally and financially invested in a product, trying to discredit the results of his tests.

I get it, finding out that you bought an expensive POS sucks. I don’t get people trying to justify it, by continuing to use it, when it’s obvious that there is no confidence left that it actually works like it should. Very odd logic.

 

[SouthPaw]

Glass quality - lht
Turrets - lht
Zero stop - lht
Locking turret - lht
Warranty - lht
Durability - supposedly swfa but form just said if drop them on their turret they break/bend.

As someone who owned both a LHT and a SWFA HD, and shot many hundreds of rounds with each respectively and hunted with both, I agree with all of the above observations comparing those particular features. However, I'll add a few other observations/opinions that I made through personal use:
Tracking/RTZ: SWFA
Performance in cold: SWFA
Reticle: SWFA for FFP, LHT for SFP
Price: SWFA
Availability: LHT

I think what this shows is the difference in feature sets that some people value over others. There is a much higher demand for certain features (glass/zerostop/illum/weight), and those are prioritized by the manufacturers and marketed hard as a result which is why you see them discussed more often on forums, at the range and at hunting camp. Some people are finding they only need/want something more simple, less expensive that just works which is why SWFA is becoming popular on RS. Especially as more folks actually test their own gear and draw their own conclusions.

 

[svivian]

I don’t understand the cult moniker. How is testing mechanical things, and posting your findings on forums come to be a cult?

the cult comment was a joke

 

[fwafwow]

I’m not sure either!!! I have zero issue with form, he’s obviously well versed in shooting and scopes. All I’ve ever done is try to explain my experience with the scope that 99% of people on this thread have discredited for no reason other than the results of one person who dropped one scope. I’m not a vortex lover, I have zeiss binos, kowa spotter, and 4 different scope manufacturers but the whole mob mentality gets old. I tried to offer up my real world experience and everytime I do I get jumped on since I didn’t drop it. Even form says “let’s meet up and drop it and I’ll buy you a new one”. He refuses to acknowledge 100s of miles of hiking, 1000s of miles of driving and all the abuse that goes along with that.

All that being said, I’ll bow out of this thread so you guys can go back to bashing vortex!

I think that you two are talking past each other (which is a generous characterization). I'm paraphrasing, but he acknowledged your experience and said it is similar to one scope being dropped - one person's experience. But he also said he's seen more than one LHT in use and that means while only one was dropped in the test, he has more experience with that particular scope model. He also pointed out that one scope's passing of a drop test or performing well in the field isn't the same as one scope failing (a drop test or in the field). None of the naysayers ever seem to acknowledge that a failure sample of one CAN be informative, or at least more informative than a succesful sample of one.

I'm not focusing so much on you ucs, as others have taken various issues with the testing, but the discussion never goes past a certain point. Can the tests be changed to eliminate more variables, include more numbers, etc.? Sure. But they are what they are, and I've not really seen anyone make an alternative proposal that is practical. If there is one - apart from stating that a manufacturer should build a machine to test many scopes - let me know.

At the end of the day, the tests are of whatever value anyone places on them. Some none. Some too much. Personally it's a starting point for me to narrow my gear list, and for which I will do some testing on my own specific models that I've mounted on my own rifles. YMMV.

 

[BjornF16]

I don’t understand the cult moniker. How is testing mechanical things, and posting your findings on forums come to be a cult?

To me it looks like those who are emotionally and financially invested in a product, trying to discredit the results of his tests.

 

[Woodrow F Call]

I'm just waiting for someone to take Form up on his offer. It's a pretty good one. Plus, everyone will probably learn something.

Maybe I should just buy a scope, do a little trash talk, and take him up on his offer? Probably would be fun.

 

[RussDXT]

I'm just waiting for someone to take Form up on his offer. It's a pretty good one. Plus, everyone will probably learn something.

Maybe I should just buy a scope, do a little trash talk, and take him up on his offer? Probably would be fun.

I had one on order a year ago, saw the test and canceled it.

Now I only have swfa, Trijicon, and Nightforce. Form has cost me some money sure, but the peace of mind is quite valuable. And I have done my own drop testing as well. It’s fascinating these do so well.

 

[cmahoney]

I had one on order a year ago, saw the test and canceled it.

Now I only have swfa, Trijicon, and Nightforce. Form has cost me some money sure, but the peace of mind is quite valuable. And I have done my own drop testing as well. It’s fascinating these do so well.

He saved you money in the long run.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

I'm just waiting for someone to take Form up on his offer. It's a pretty good one. Plus, everyone will probably learn something.

Maybe I should just buy a scope, do a little trash talk, and take him up on his offer? Probably would be fun.

The offer is usually reserved for people that say it’s bs, generally on multiple forums.

Quite a few people have asked to see it in person, and the ones that have all left understanding that there are in fact differences between scopes.

 

[Dobermann]

There is only one reason that someone who has a scope that they trust 100% wouldn’t take Form up on his offer. They don’t trust their scope!

Maybe ...

Or, because Form has said he would keep the one that passes the test, and buy them a new one, they don't want to flip the coin on another random sample of that scope.

Which would both be rational, but would also still tell us something about the faith that even people who had good experiences with one sample might have with the model/brand overall.

In some ways, I think that says more ...

 

[nobody]

Maybe ...

Or, because Form has said he would keep the one that passes the test, and buy them a new one, they don't want to flip the coin on another random sample of that scope.

Which would both be rational, but would also still tell us something about the faith that even people who had good experiences with one sample might have with the model/brand overall.

In some ways, I think that says more ...

Form isn’t saying he would keep the one that passes, he is saying that if the scope passed, he would buy the person who owns it another one for their collection so that they have more than one in the safe. He’s making a bet, and based on the track record of most scopes, he feels confident he won’t fork over a dime.

 

[sndmn11]

View attachment 502854

Can you sketch me into the background sitting in a lawn chair with a party hat on?

Maybe with a carton of coconut water and a gluten free burrito cause I know @Ucsdryder also dislikes those and I can never get him to halfsies on either for mountain trips.

 

[JCMCUBIC]

Form isn’t saying he would keep the one that passes, he is saying that if the scope passed, he would buy the person who owns it another one for their collection so that they have more than one in the safe. He’s making a bet, and based on the track record of most scopes, he feels confident he won’t fork over a dime.

I'm in! I'll bring my favorite 6x42 PMII. To be completely upfront, it was ~2 cm low with a 6 shot group at 109 yards after a ~25' fall a while back...I didn't repeat it multiple times though, just once so it could be suspect. I'll go ahead and start the special order for one as it takes a while. ...grin...

I do appreciate getting to read the results of the tests.

View from above:

Looking up from ground:

 

[Dobermann]

Form isn’t saying he would keep the one that passes, he is saying that if the scope passed, he would buy the person who owns it another one for their collection so that they have more than one in the safe. He’s making a bet, and based on the track record of most scopes, he feels confident he won’t fork over a dime.

Huh ... I must have mis-read his post, then,

That makes the offer all the more hilarious ... and all the harder for someone to have a good excuse to turn it down.

 

[Ryan Avery]

SWFA absolutely wins in the fugly category!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro