4 ms·

For those curious, the specific scope is this one: https://vortexoptics.com/razor-hd-gen-iii-6-36x56.html https://vortexoptics.com/razor-hd-gen-iii-6-36x56.html

by Vexs 4y ago

alostpuppy 4y ago
I really expected it to be more expensive.
- walrus01 4y ago
  Anything more expensive available for civilians is generally thermal or night vision, it's easy to spend $6k-8k on a scope with half the zoom but thermal 640x384 sensor capabilities. People use $4000-9000 thermal scopes at much less zoom and much shorter ranges under 400 yards shooting feral hogs in Texas.
- hajile 4y ago
  They aren't quite at the top-end price of traditional scopes. Hensoldt makes scopes that go for almost $8k. They aren't aiming for a 4-6 inch target though (I seriously doubt you could even see that with 35x at 4.5 miles). They are aiming for the center of a target 7.5 feet by 10 feet. The difference between that 8k scope and this 4k scope is mostly a tiny bit of clarity and last 2-3% of fit and finish. Neither of these would affect scope accuracy and the clarity wouldn't exist at that range anyway due to particles in the air. No purpose in special ordering one and blowing 4k that could be spent elsewhere on something that won't impact the actual shot.
Cd00d 4y ago
What is that they have mounted on the front of the scope?
- dymk 4y ago
  Looks like a Charlie TARAC from the youtube comments - https://tacomhq.com/charlie-tarac/ https://tacomhq.com/charlie-tarac/
  - throw0101c 4y ago
    This device was probably used to accomplish the longest-distance (3541m) sniper kill: * https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/tech-behind-record-setting-2-2-mile-sniper-kill/ https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/tech-behind-record-settin...
SV_BubbleTime 4y ago
I read GP’s fascination with some surely extreme optic… Then your post to see, oh, I have that one. It’s good, but I’ve had better, and it’s heavy which doesn’t matter in this application.
- 2-718-281-828 4y ago
  given that this devices was successfully used for such a long distance shot and chosen by people capable of that type of a feat it is questionable for someone else to say that there's something "better". with regard to aiming on long distance - how can there something be better? maybe you meant to state that you own models which are better suited for your specific use case.
  - SV_BubbleTime 4y ago
    There are about a dozen objectively better scopes than this. It’s stunningly obvious you aren’t a long range shooter. The logic doesn’t hold water. If I win a competition with x scope, it doesn’t mean there aren’t better ones; it just means I didn’t use y when I did some thing. I have Nightforce ATACR 7-35x56 and Khales that are both objectively better optics than the Vortex Razor HD III. But yea, maybe check out “what the pros use” for ELR, the Vortex line is a distant third. https://precisionrifleblog.com/2020/09/05/best-elr-scope-and-scope-mount-and-rings/ https://precisionrifleblog.com/2020/09/05/best-elr-scope-and...
    - 2-718-281-828 4y ago
      so, you think they could have achieved a more impressive result by choosing a better scope of your choice? you should let them know. they are probably already waiting for your opinion!
Sporktacular 4y ago
From the photo of the scope on the gun, it's pitched down so much the barrel is almost in the way. EDIT, and I see now that's why they put the periscope ahead of it. That lets them dial past the scope's zeroing limits.
throw0101c 4y ago
Technical minutia curiosity: I wonder if they used MOA or MRAD. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minute_and_second_of_arc#Firearms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minute_and_second_of_arc#Firea... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milliradian https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milliradian

For those curious, the specific scope is this one: https://vortexoptics.com/razor-hd-gen-iii-6-36x56.html https://vortexoptics.com/razor-hd-gen-iii-6-36x56.html

by Vexs 4y ago

For those curious, the specific scope is this one: https://vortexoptics.com/razor-hd-gen-iii-6-36x56.html https://vortexoptics.com/razor-hd-gen-iii-6-36x56.html

alostpuppy 4y ago

I really expected it to be more expensive.

walrus01 4y ago
Anything more expensive available for civilians is generally thermal or night vision, it's easy to spend $6k-8k on a scope with half the zoom but thermal 640x384 sensor capabilities. People use $4000-9000 thermal scopes at much less zoom and much shorter ranges under 400 yards shooting feral hogs in Texas.
hajile 4y ago
They aren't quite at the top-end price of traditional scopes. Hensoldt makes scopes that go for almost $8k. They aren't aiming for a 4-6 inch target though (I seriously doubt you could even see that with 35x at 4.5 miles). They are aiming for the center of a target 7.5 feet by 10 feet. The difference between that 8k scope and this 4k scope is mostly a tiny bit of clarity and last 2-3% of fit and finish. Neither of these would affect scope accuracy and the clarity wouldn't exist at that range anyway due to particles in the air. No purpose in special ordering one and blowing 4k that could be spent elsewhere on something that won't impact the actual shot.

Cd00d 4y ago

What is that they have mounted on the front of the scope?

dymk 4y ago
Looks like a Charlie TARAC from the youtube comments - https://tacomhq.com/charlie-tarac/ https://tacomhq.com/charlie-tarac/
- throw0101c 4y ago
  This device was probably used to accomplish the longest-distance (3541m) sniper kill: * https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/tech-behind-record-setting-2-2-mile-sniper-kill/ https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/tech-behind-record-settin...

SV_BubbleTime 4y ago

I read GP’s fascination with some surely extreme optic… Then your post to see, oh, I have that one. It’s good, but I’ve had better, and it’s heavy which doesn’t matter in this application.

2-718-281-828 4y ago
given that this devices was successfully used for such a long distance shot and chosen by people capable of that type of a feat it is questionable for someone else to say that there's something "better". with regard to aiming on long distance - how can there something be better? maybe you meant to state that you own models which are better suited for your specific use case.
- SV_BubbleTime 4y ago
  There are about a dozen objectively better scopes than this. It’s stunningly obvious you aren’t a long range shooter. The logic doesn’t hold water. If I win a competition with x scope, it doesn’t mean there aren’t better ones; it just means I didn’t use y when I did some thing. I have Nightforce ATACR 7-35x56 and Khales that are both objectively better optics than the Vortex Razor HD III. But yea, maybe check out “what the pros use” for ELR, the Vortex line is a distant third. https://precisionrifleblog.com/2020/09/05/best-elr-scope-and-scope-mount-and-rings/ https://precisionrifleblog.com/2020/09/05/best-elr-scope-and...
  - 2-718-281-828 4y ago
    so, you think they could have achieved a more impressive result by choosing a better scope of your choice? you should let them know. they are probably already waiting for your opinion!

Sporktacular 4y ago

From the photo of the scope on the gun, it's pitched down so much the barrel is almost in the way. EDIT, and I see now that's why they put the periscope ahead of it. That lets them dial past the scope's zeroing limits.

throw0101c 4y ago

Technical minutia curiosity: I wonder if they used MOA or MRAD. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minute_and_second_of_arc#Firearms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minute_and_second_of_arc#Firea... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milliradian https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milliradian