Vortex Razor HD LHT 4.5-22x50mm Q&A

[roosiebull]

I fought the same feeling for the last couple years. I finally caved and bought several cement blocks to mount atop my rifles. I sleep better now. It absolutely sucks that no one (other than SWFA, but never in stock and FFP only) can make a reliable scope without it weighing two pounds. I wish someone would figure out titanium in a riflescope. Scope manufacturers keep "innovating" with features like better glass coatings and more zoom range and other crap we don't need, instead of finding ways to put scopes on a diet without losing reliability. A reliable Swaro Z6 or a Zeiss V6 would be the be all end all for me! Until then, cement blocks are the only answer, and because we keep buying them (and suckers also keep buying bells and whistles on scopes that don't work), there's no need for manufacturers to change anything. So the circle goes round and round...

cement actually doesn't do well with side impacts.... not to be a Debbie downer, but....

 

[roosiebull]

I don't understand the fuss with 10 ounces when it means your optic is way less likely to fail.

i agree (i didn't used to though) if i want an ultralight rifle, i will shave weight with the firearm so i can have a reliable optic.... some weight is worth packing.

i don't think i have owned a scope that hasn't lost zero at some point... usually not crazy, but LOTS of 2" shifts in zero @ 100yds over the years.... i also shopped heavily on weight, which kept me in weak scopes. i just figured that's what scopes were

 

[Brandon.miller.4]

Anyone ever think this lightweight shit has just got out of hand? Maybe we are just soft these days...I can't help but wonder what some 3rd world packers would think if they saw what I spend on ultralight gear. They probably think we're all a bunch of pussies...and they're probably right.

 

[Formidilosus]

you must not backpack hunt.

The keyword in that phrase is “hunt” not “backpack”. Hunt implies aiming at and shooting something.


Yes, it would be cool if scopes were lighter. No, scope reliability is not the place to compromise on. I can not see how going from a 20 oz scope that will hold zero and work correctly to a 16oz scope that is fragile is a good trade off. It isn’t “light and smart”, it moves into the “stupid light” category. There is a bombproof 17oz scope- the NF NX8 1-8x.

 

[KHNC]

The keyword in that phrase is “hunt” not “backpack”. Hunt implies aiming at and shooting something.


Yes, it would be cool if scopes were lighter. No, scope reliability is not the place to compromise on. I can not see how going from a 20 oz scope that will hold zero and work correctly to a 16oz scope that is fragile is a good trade off. It isn’t “light and smart”, it moves into the “stupid light” category. There is a bombproof 17oz scope- the NF NX8 1-8x.

Your "average" long range shooter will not function well with a 1-8x scope. Experienced LR shooter, then yes. Still pretty weak magnification for anything past 400yds. I was referring to 22oz vs 32-34oz. It is very difficult to shave weight past a certain point on a firearm.

 

[Formidilosus]

Your "average" long range shooter will not function well with a 1-8x scope. Experienced LR shooter, then yes. Still pretty weak magnification for anything past 400yds. I was referring to 22oz vs 32-34oz. It is very difficult to shave weight past a certain point on a firearm.

I’m not saying that the 1-8x is a LR scope, however anyone that can not kill at will with 8x to way past 400, has a serious lack of skill or has never tried. Ryan Avery’s uncle used 8.5x at 970 yards to pole ax an elk. I purposely and specifically have new shooters/hunters or anyone training LR use a fixed 6x. They shoot and kill way past 400 yards regularly.


As for weight, 22oz gets into reliable scopes. 32-34oz is dedicated LR scope territory- as in routine use past 1,100-1,200 yards.

 

[Stu]

I’m not saying that the 1-8x is a LR scope, however anyone that can not kill at will with 8x to way past 400, has a serious lack of skill or has never tried. Ryan Avery’s uncle used 8.5x at 970 yards to pole ax an elk. I purposely and specifically have we shooters/hunters or anyone training LR use a fixed 6x. They shoot and kill way past 400 yards regularly.


As for weight, 22oz gets into reliable scopes. 32-34oz is dedicated LR scope territory- as in routine use past 1,100-1,200 yards.

I thought using a 6x power scope at distance would be a big handicap. As hard as I tried, I couldn't see any significant difference with rounds on target out to 800 yards between my 6x vs. other scopes up to 20x. 800 yards is about the max I can shoot on a regular basis. I guess if you primarily aim at 1/2 MOA or smaller targets that would change things, but I can't shoot 1/2 MOA.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

I thought using a 6x power scope at distance would be a big handicap. As hard as I tried, I couldn't see any significant difference with rounds on target out to 800 yards between my 6x vs. other scopes up to 20x. 800 yards is about the max I can shoot on a regular basis. I guess if you primarily aim at 1/2 MOA or smaller targets that would change things, but I can't shoot 1/2 MOA.

Was curious so I grabbed an unused scope (3-9 Diamondback), tripod, and my Tri-Clawps. No firearm was present.

Drove to the end of the street and took a look at the traffic light. Don’t know if each light is 8” or 12”. Going to assume 8”.

At 1K yards the “dot” covered a lot of the light. At 800 yards the “dot” blocked a chunk of the light. Not much discernible coverage difference at 6x vs 9x. Totally not accurate measurements but gives an idea.

6x and 9x could allow for a somewhat accurate shot on an elk but you run the risk of covering too much of the target on smaller game.

A cat cooperated at 800 yards and there’s no way I could have made an accurate shot. At best it’d be front half. A pedestrian (800 and 1000) crossed and I could do “right pec” but not “Adidas logo”. Note: this is with a stark contrast to the background which I’ve rarely encountered while hunting.

Do know that most Coues that I’ve shot have been obscured to some degree. On my longest kill (840) I was wanting more than the 20x that I had as just his shoulder was exposed behind a bush and it was tough to make out. Really had to rely upon and trust my spotter that day (plus his wind call). Made the high shoulder shot (first shot) thankfully.

Long winded response to say that the 3-9 can be made to work in a lot of hunting scenarios but is not the perfect magnification range for all hunting scenarios. This does run counter to what some profess.

 

[Formidilosus]

Was curious so I grabbed an unused scope (3-9 Diamondback), tripod, and my Tri-Clawps. No firearm was present.

Drove to the end of the street and took a look at the traffic light. Don’t know if each light is 8” or 12”. Going to assume 8”.

At 1K yards the “dot” covered a lot of the light. At 800 yards the “dot” blocked a chunk of the light. Not much discernible coverage difference at 6x vs 9x. Totally not accurate measurements but gives an idea.

6x and 9x could allow for a somewhat accurate shot on an elk but you run the risk of covering too much of the target on smaller game.

A cat cooperated at 800 yards and there’s no way I could have made an accurate shot. At best it’d be front half. A pedestrian (800 and 1000) crossed and I could do “right pec” but not “Adidas logo”. Note: this is with a stark contrast to the background which I’ve rarely encountered while hunting.

At least you went and looked.

To hit things all you need to be able to do is place the aiming reference over the center of the target. Front half of a cat and you believe that isn’t enough fir a big game scope?


Without issue one cam aim at and center a 1” dot at 100 yards with a SWFA SS 6x. That means a 10” target at 1,000 yards can also be centered.

We had a 6x SWFA set up a couple years ago in the evening aiming at deer with a group that believed that 6x was useless for distance. After playing with it everyone of them said they could shoot the deer in the head if they wanted.

Do know that most Coues that I’ve shot have been obscured to some degree. On my longest kill (840) I was wanting more than the 20x that I had as just his shoulder was exposed behind a bush and it was tough to make out. Really had to rely upon and trust my spotter that day (plus his wind call). Made the high shoulder shot (first shot) thankfully.

Long winded response to say that the 3-9 can be made to work in a lot of hunting scenarios but is not the perfect magnification range for all hunting scenarios. This does run counter to what some profess.

Coues deer hunting how some do it, falls into the specialized category to me. That’s the one hunting I’ve done and seen that resembles more a PRS match than traditional spot and stalk western hunting. As a general purpose rifle scope from close to true medium range hunting 6-10x top end is fine. For Coues I would have a dedicated rifle setup.

 

[ChrisAU]

There’s a 2.5-10x32 NXS Compact in the classifieds right now. Just under 18oz per the seller. That’s about the highest durability per ounce out there.

 

[BjornF16]

There’s a 2.5-10x32 NXS Compact in the classifieds right now. Just under 18oz per the seller. That’s about the highest durability per ounce out there.

Right up @SDHNTR alley, F2 NP-1 reticle

 

[ChrisAU]

Right up @SDHNTR alley, F2 NP-1 reticle

If it were in MILs it’d be mine!

 

[id_jon]

you must not backpack hunt.

Not all backpack hunters count ounces.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

At least you went and looked.

To hit things all you need to be able to do is place the aiming reference over the center of the target. Front half of a cat and you believe that isn’t enough fir a big game scope?


Without issue one cam aim at and center a 1” dot at 100 yards with a SWFA SS 6x. That means a 10” target at 1,000 yards can also be centered.

We had a 6x SWFA set up a couple years ago in the evening aiming at deer with a group that believed that 6x was useless for distance. After playing with it everyone of them said they could shoot the deer in the head if they wanted.







Coues deer hunting how some do it, falls into the specialized category to me. That’s the one hunting I’ve done and seen that resembles more a PRS match than traditional spot and stalk western hunting. As a general purpose rifle scope from close to true medium range hunting 6-10x top end is fine. For Coues I would have a dedicated rifle setup.

Didn’t have a higher magnification scope that wasn’t attached to a rifle. And didn’t want the police called. So I wasn’t able to actually compare scopes.

Will see about heading out this weekend and put crosshairs on a deer (no bolt in the rifles just to be safe).

 

[Dioni A]

you must not backpack hunt.

Not everyone is a weight weenie.

 

[WRO]

Well i do have an XLR chassis shipping to me now that i ordered last year. I didnt buy it to put a 32oz scope on top of it. I have a friend that spent 10 years in SF in the Army. He went through sniper training as well. Absolutely swears by Leupold on everything. Doubtful his scopes were subjected to less than forms testing when on the battlefield in afghanistan. I dont like Leupold , but I still have one on a HOWA 308 that has been fine over the years. Testing shows failures on leupold but his weapon optics didnt fail him when he needed them to perform. Im staying with the Zeiss V6 and the few Viper HSLR's I have at the moment.

Eat more salads and then the 10oz's wont matter.

 

[packgoatguy]

Two things, one- ring spacing is a thing. Getting the rings mounted on the tube as far from center as possible helps with zero retention. Two, on 700 and Savages, or any rifle without an integral rail; degreasing and bedding the base or one piece rings is the way to go for rugged use. Personally, I would go with as low a profile Pic rail as I could get and permanently bed them to the receiver.

Form, I'm sorry if this is a hijack... but on the topic of not wanting to lose zero; I read your detailed posts from a while back about the steps you recommend for properly mounting a scope. You include using loctite as an essential part of the process. What is your theory on/experience with rings or bases that the manufacturer specifically states to not use a threadlocker on? I'm thinking of DNZ game reaper 1 piece mounts specifically, where their instructions indicates they have longer than normal screws that don't require threadlocker, and even state they will not warranty if they find evidence of threadlocker being used. Any thoughts or experience with this?

Also, when you permanently bed a rail to a receiver, what adhesive compound do you suggest?

 

[KHNC]

Eat more salads and then the 10oz's wont matter.

Preaching to the quire on that one. Mountains and hiking dont bother me. Surely you dont think thats the only place I have looked to cut weight do you? I no longer use a heavy stabilizer or a heavy sight on my bow either. If i wanted to carry it, i could and would. I choose not to if i dont have to.

 

[WRO]

Preaching to the quire on that one. Mountains and hiking dont bother me. Surely you dont think thats the only place I have looked to cut weight do you? I no longer use a heavy stabilizer or a heavy sight on my bow either. If i wanted to carry it, i could and would. I choose not to if i dont have to.

I carry lots of heavy stuff so I'm not the guy to ask about cutting weight. Both of my rifles wear K series kahles and weigh 10lbs and more often than not I've got a BTX 95 in my pack.

I did pick up a super light tripod set to run my bino's on.

 

[KHNC]

I carry lots of heavy stuff so I'm not the guy to ask about cutting weight. Both of my rifles wear K series kahles and weigh 10lbs and more often than not I've got a BTX 95 in my pack.

I did pick up a super light tripod set to run my bino's on.

Ahhh, i did that for years too. Then i decided that since all that quality light weight gear is out there, why not use some of it. Dumped my 6-7lb empty pack first for a lightweight frame pack at 3lbs that ive hauled 80lb elk , deer and lion loads out with on multiple occassions. Lightened my bow by 2lbs, went with a CA carbon classic for rifle hunts, lightweight Innov8 boots, 2 small skinning knives , super lite headlamp....pretty much cut weight every where i could. Its just plain dumb to ruck around 40lbs pack plus heavy weapon all day when you didnt even kill anything. When you do kill, then you have to haul all that shit down the mountain on the first trip with 1/3 less meat than you could have taken with you. May result in an extra round trip to haul. Id rather be at camp resting to help my buddy kill the next day, or for him to help me. Salads dont solve any of those things.