Warp and Okie--knock off the crap and drive on----
Warp and Okie--knock off the crap and drive on----
GET IN YOUR BUBBLE!
This is my official vote as well.
I had a Gen II E and it was fantastic, but I once the III came out I knew it was a matter of time until I upgraded. Was not disappointed.
It's a great RDS sub (as much as an LPVO that doesn't have unlimited eye relief can be) at 1X with the nuclear bright eye grabbing red dot, yet also works extremely well for higher power precise shooting with the semi-transparent 1 MOA center dot.
The center dot and the four surrounding hash marks are all illuminated, and at low power (like 1-2x, maybe 3x depending) the hash marks coalesce with the center dot to give you the nice big bright RDS that you want for speed at low power/1x. But as soon as you dial in any zoom, they separate, and the partly see-through 1 MOA center is excellent for carefully aimed precision.
You can find a lot of in depth reviews and reticle breakdowns on YouTube and forums if you want to learn more, but a little prequel: The SME's and YouTube personas I trust (like Aaron Cowan, Defoor, John Lovell, Mike aka Garand Thumb, etc) I have found universally praise it.
It really seems like a can't-go-wrong choice.
I said previously that with your concern for 1X, you should be concerned with FOV. Well, the Razors have fantastic FOV. The Gen III has a tiny bit more than the Gen II, even, and despite being a FFP that goes to 10x, it's FOV on 1x bests many of the best SFP scopes out there
At the same time, you are talking about 500 yards...so the super usable FFP reticle and 10x mag also appears to be a great match for your intentions. I sure as hell wouldn't want to use a 3x magnifier on an RDS shooting to 500 yards or anywhere even close.
I have both (K16i SMI for the Kahles) and they are 1x eyebox monsters.
But you know what? The FFP Gen III Razor falls in between those two. More FOV than the Gen II, little less than the Kahles.
The Gen III Razor is just a winner
just a comment about the type of shooting one is likely to do. wild speculation here, but were in i someplace like oklahoma where you might want to shoot something really close, but you can also see 15 miles in every direction, the odds that i would either be on 1x or max magnification are pretty good. flipping a magnifier back and forth might be a pretty good solution.
last year i moved into the national forest in the east TN mountains, and my thoughts have changed a bit. I mostly practice on 6" circles, from 10-160 yards or so, and my eyes are not what they used to be.
I find that even the 1.2x mag is noticeably slower on the shot timer than 1x, so i definitely like the 1x for up close targets. and if I'm shooting out to 300-400-500 yards, i definitely like the 8x. but in the 80-120 yard range, with targets deep in the woods, i find it helps to move the dial to 2x-3x. Anything more and I get slower. Anything less and i start leaking rounds just off the edge of the plate.
on 1x, i feel like i'm shooting a red dot. one 8x i feel like i'm shooting precision rifle. on 2-3x i feel like i'm wearing reading glasses. I don't really use 4-7x
All I can say is I am very pleased with my K16i SMI. I don't think I could have done any better at the time for myself but I'll be looking hard at Vortex RAZOR HD GEN III 1-10X24 FFP for my next purchase.
Gettin' down innagrass.
Let's Go Brandon!
Bookmarks