Delta Stryker 3.5-21x44 DLR-3

T

tikka_rfn

Registered from Ireland
Minuteman
Oct 28, 2018
32
12
#1
Just looking for feedback from anyone who has this scope, even if you have the DPRC ret.

It'll be going on a Tikka T3X CTR .308, which currently has a PST GENII 5-25x50 on it, use is for hunting mostly, very occassional target work. Hunting shots range from 50m to 400m max.

Its obviously not designed as a hunting scope but I dont really like moa/sfp or mrad/sfp
 
#2
I tested the Delta with the DPRC reticle early this year, and from the top of my head; you will be getting much better turrets compared to the PST. The Delta also have a lot more adjustment range than the PST.
Its been a while since I looked through a PST last, so I am not sure about the glass. But I found the Delta to have a better than expected eye box and good if not great glass for its price point.
 
#3
Thanks for the feedback. One thing I like is the capped windage turret on the Delta, PST windage rolled a couple of clicks more than once out hunting, to be fair when adjusted back it was bang on.

For the price point id think/hope the Delta glass is better than my PST, obviously the smaller obj might effect light transmission but I dont take many shots at first/last light anyways
 
#6
tikka_rfn said:
Thanks for the feedback. One thing I like is the capped windage turret on the Delta, PST windage rolled a couple of clicks more than once out hunting, to be fair when adjusted back it was bang on.

For the price point id think/hope the Delta glass is better than my PST, obviously the smaller obj might effect light transmission but I dont take many shots at first/last light anyways
Click to expand...
The optics is bright and eyebox is easy to get behind all the way up to about 18x, after that it gets a bit dark and narrow. At least to my eyes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flogxal and tikka_rfn
#9
patriot07 said:
I had a Delta Stryker 4.5-30x56 on my Tikka for years. Fantastic scope. I just upgraded recently to the Burris XTR Pro. Love the Burris but sometimes I miss the Delta. They make great scopes
Click to expand...
The 5-25 PST is a little too much for the hunting I do now, just had a look at the XTR pro, Do you use that for target or hunting?

You had a different model but good to know you liked your Delta
 
#10
Mostly use the XTR Pro for target shooting. But it would do fine for either.

It and the Delta are very close. The Delta might even resolve things more clearly, but the field of view is so nice in the Burris that I decided to go that direction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flogxal and tikka_rfn
#11
patriot07 said:
Mostly use the XTR Pro for target shooting. But it would do fine for either.

It and the Delta are very close. The Delta might even resolve things more clearly, but the field of view is so nice in the Burris that I decided to go that direction.
Click to expand...
Ill be doing the opposite, mostly using the delta for hunting.

The Delta has a wider, on paper, albeit slightly, FOV than the PST, but the mag range is lower
 
#12
VargmatII said:
The optics is bright and eyebox is easy to get behind all the way up to about 18x, after that it gets a bit dark and narrow. At least to my eyes.
Click to expand...
That's how I would describe it. And the 18-21x isn't bad, it just is a bit darker, and tighter eyebox. It doesn't shut down after 18x. I ran mine last year in regional PRS and really liked it. A lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VargmatII and tikka_rfn
#13
tikka_rfn said:
Ill be doing the opposite, mostly using the delta for hunting.

The Delta has a wider, on paper, albeit slightly, FOV than the PST, but the mag range is lower
Click to expand...
You're looking at a different Delta than I had.

The view through the scope on the XTR3 and XTR Pro is just so full-field that it really provides a nice viewing experience.

But you'll be very happy with the Delta I'm sure. I had no real reason to upgrade from mine, and would have been just as happy to keep using it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tikka_rfn
#14
patriot07 said:
You're looking at a different Delta than I had.

The view through the scope on the XTR3 and XTR Pro is just so full-field that it really provides a nice viewing experience.

But you'll be very happy with the Delta I'm sure. I had no real reason to upgrade from mine, and would have been just as happy to keep using it.
Click to expand...
The 3.5-21x44 Delta is a newer design than the 4.5-30x56 you have, so the apparent FOV is wider. It is not quite as wide as on the XTR Pro, but close.

1755743089736.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Charmingmander, patriot07, tikka_rfn and 1 other person
#15
patriot07 said:
Mostly use the XTR Pro for target shooting. But it would do fine for either.

It and the Delta are very close. The Delta might even resolve things more clearly, but the field of view is so nice in the Burris that I decided to go that direction.
Click to expand...
I don't mean to put koshkin on the spot, but from externals only, the two seem to be the same essential design with minor differences. Wasn't the Bushnell around longer, and Delta took it as template for improvements/differences resulting in the 3.5x-21?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tikka_rfn
#17
koshkin said:
The 3.5-21x44 Delta is a newer design than the 4.5-30x56 you have, so the apparent FOV is wider. It is not quite as wide as on the XTR Pro, but close.

View attachment 8751468
Click to expand...
Just shot my first ELR competition last weekend with a borrowed rifle, now I need to build one myself (light class on a budget)
Is the IQ of this scope good enough to spot my shots at 2k+ yards?
Looking hard at the Delta 3.5-21 due to price and adjustment range, the 4-25 Zeiss LRP S3 is also something I'm looking hard at.
I noticed that even at 2k+ I rarely went over 16-18x magnification, so I'm not so concerned about maximum magnification.
I'm more interested in elevation travel than maximum magnification.
@koshkin , what are your thoughts after looking through this scope?
 
#18
BobKaare said:
Just shot my first ELR competition last weekend with a borrowed rifle, now I need to build one myself (light class on a budget)
Is the IQ of this scope good enough to spot my shots at 2k+ yards?
Looking hard at the Delta 3.5-21 due to price and adjustment range, the 4-25 Zeiss LRP S3 is also something I'm looking hard at.
I noticed that even at 2k+ I rarely went over 16-18x magnification, so I'm not so concerned about maximum magnification.
I'm more interested in elevation travel than maximum magnification.
@koshkin , what are your thoughts after looking through this scope?
Click to expand...
That’s further than i ever shot with it, but it does have a ton of adjustment range in case you need it.
It basically comes down to how much value you place on compactness.
I would be perfectly comfortable using it in that function, but the simple truth is that if you are going to spend the bulk of your time on higher mags and there is no weight/size limitation, larger objective scopes like XTR Pro will have an edge.
Is there a weight limit you have to hit?
What is the price limit for you on this scope?
How much elevation range do you need?

Ilya
 
  • Like
Reactions: tikka_rfn
#19
flogxal said:
I don't mean to put koshkin on the spot, but from externals only, the two seem to be the same essential design with minor differences. Wasn't the Bushnell around longer, and Delta took it as template for improvements/differences resulting in the 3.5x-21?
Click to expand...
A few years ago when the 3.5-21x44 was first conceived, i used to consult for Delta. The initial concept behind this scope came out of that, largely because i was semi obsessed with a compact precision oriented allrounder at the time and formulated a set of requirements for it. There are a few scopes on the market that came out of that. Given the same OEM, i would guess the erector system is similar to the DMR Bushnell (those are commonly shared between different designs), but i have reasonable confidence that the rest of this scope has been unique to Delta until Revic picked it up.

Ilya
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bart, XP1K, VargmatII and 2 others
#22
tikka_rfn said:
It'll mostly be used for hunting at ranges 400m and less so I can't imagine id ever need to go above 18x too many times.
Click to expand...
My primary range for longer distances goes to 600m. Other range max 300yds. Have spent plenty of time looking and shooting through the Delta at both. I think you will be very happy with the 3.5-21x Delta for that 0-400m. Doubt you'd ever even encounter that slightly darker image, slightly smaller eyebox at 18-21x unless you are looking at your 100m zero targets and trying for max magnification. But that's a calm, settled position, right?

I haven't looked through Steiner's H6Xi 2-12 or 3-18 models, but they might be contenders if the 28oz Delta is making you worry on weight. I don't find it a problem myself, have run it on 16" and 18" AR semi autos, and it feels very nicely balanced. But others chase lightness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tikka_rfn
#23
flogxal said:
My primary range for longer distances goes to 600m. Other range max 300yds. Have spent plenty of time looking and shooting through the Delta at both. I think you will be very happy with the 3.5-21x Delta for that 0-400m. Doubt you'd ever even encounter that slightly darker image, slightly smaller eyebox at 18-21x unless you are looking at your 100m zero targets and trying for max magnification. But that's a calm, settled position, right?

I haven't looked through Steiner's H6Xi 2-12 or 3-18 models, but they might be contenders if the 28oz Delta is making you worry on weight. I don't find it a problem myself, have run it on 16" and 18" AR semi autos, and it feels very nicely balanced. But others chase lightness.
Click to expand...

From all the feedback I've gotten my mind is made up. For the price, €1500($1760), I don't think I'll find another scope with the features. The 28oz doesn't bother me as 1. Ive ran a PST Gen II for years, 31.2oz, and 2. my Tikka will be coming out of its KRG X-Ray and into a carbon stock.
Yea I can't imagine above 18x will ever be an issue.

Hadn't considered the H6xi but after a quick google, hard for me to get here in Ireland and north of €2000($2345)
 
  • Like
Reactions: flogxal
#26
I'm just going to throw a spanner in the works of my own thread. Didn't see the point in a new thread, appreciate all the feedback so far.

I started this to ask about the Delta, vs my PST gen 2, but I can pick up a Leupold Mark 4HD 4.5-18 PR1 illum for the same price as the Delta. And Im just wondering is the Leupold a better scope for the money than the Delta?

Stryker is slightly heavier, 40g(1.4oz), than the Mk4HD, near as makes nodifference really. Stryker has better FOV listed, 6.33-1.06° vs 4.4-1°,even with higher upper mag(21x vs18x), and 9 mil more Elevation adjustment. DLR-3 and PR1 reticles are similar(ish), except the way the illum is done.

Any opinions greatly appreciated.
 
#27
I've had 2 different Mk5hd 3.6-18, I wanted to like them, but just never could. The glass wasn't as crisp as the 5-25 sister samples I had, and it darkened quite a bit above 15x. I def feel the Stryker is a better scope optically. Wish it had a locking elevation turret like the new locking windage.

I compared the Stryker VS an atacr 420 at low light a week ago and the Stryker showed a bit less resolution, and slight losses of clarity at edges VS the NF. However it was still totally usable. The Stryker through scope view is more pleasant as the NF has a lot black ring around the edge of FOV, so the Stryker appeared more live and closer even tho it wasn't. I think the 4-20 scope model is the optimal setup for hunting or gas guns, if they could keep them in that 24-28oz range, durable, locking turrets, ffp with good reticles, I'd buy many of them.

Was shooting steel at 660 and 850 a week ago when the mirage started turning up with late morning sun and the scope handled it pretty well. Had no problems seeing hits or splash at 850y with a 6mm going 2850mv.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flogxal and tikka_rfn
#28
tikka_rfn said:
I'm just going to throw a spanner in the works of my own thread. Didn't see the point in a new thread, appreciate all the feedback so far.

I started this to ask about the Delta, vs my PST gen 2, but I can pick up a Leupold Mark 4HD 4.5-18 PR1 illum for the same price as the Delta. And Im just wondering is the Leupold a better scope for the money than the Delta?

Stryker is slightly heavier, 40g(1.4oz), than the Mk4HD, near as makes nodifference really. Stryker has better FOV listed, 6.33-1.06° vs 4.4-1°,even with higher upper mag(21x vs18x), and 9 mil more Elevation adjustment. DLR-3 and PR1 reticles are similar(ish), except the way the illum is done.

Any opinions greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...
I have both of them. Mark 4HD 4.5-18x52 has an edge in low light due to a larger objective. I also like the locking turrets for hunting. Stryker has better FOV on the same magnification and is shorter with a larger adjustment range.

In terms of pure image quality, it is pretty close. I think Stryker has a slight resolution edge. Mark4HD has slightly better contrast.

ILya
 
  • Like
Reactions: flogxal and tikka_rfn
#29
koshkin said:
That’s further than i ever shot with it, but it does have a ton of adjustment range in case you need it.
It basically comes down to how much value you place on compactness.
I would be perfectly comfortable using it in that function, but the simple truth is that if you are going to spend the bulk of your time on higher mags and there is no weight/size limitation, larger objective scopes like XTR Pro will have an edge.
Is there a weight limit you have to hit?
What is the price limit for you on this scope?
How much elevation range do you need?

Ilya
Click to expand...
As much elevation as possible, I'd like to keep budget for optic around the $2k mark, but if needed can probably stretch it a bit.
Was mostly wondering if it falls apart optically at higher end of magnification range, as I rarely use 20X or higher, mostly for spotting others really.
Compactness doesn't really matter, it was mostly the huge elevation range that made me interested, also why I'm looking at the Zeiss LRP S3 in 4-25 as well.
I want to get as far as I can without running a prism.
This will most likely be for a 300 PRC build, as light class ELR here in Norway is capped at .30 cal, and on a budget a 300 PRC is probably the easiest way to go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tikka_rfn
#30
@406shootist
Thats a great vote of confidence for the Delta. Like I said in my OP ranges ill be hunting at are less than 400m

@koshkin
All things being equal would you recommend one of the other?

@BobKaare
I do little to no target shooting these days, very occassionally, and a Zeiss LRP is out of my price range.

I realise the 2 scopes Im looking at, originally 1, aren't really crossover scopes. I work in mrad and I like FFP.

I only really look at gear/optics when I need/want something new. I kind of stumbled on the Mk4HD. After a little bit of research, should I be worried about QC on the Mk4HD vs the Delta? Returning a Leupold for warranty out of the box would be a pita from Europe.
 
#31
tikka_rfn said:
@406shootist
Thats a great vote of confidence for the Delta. Like I said in my OP ranges ill be hunting at are less than 400m

@koshkin
All things being equal would you recommend one of the other?

@BobKaare
I do little to no target shooting these days, very occassionally, and a Zeiss LRP is out of my price range.

I realise the 2 scopes Im looking at, originally 1, aren't really crossover scopes. I work in mrad and I like FFP.

I only really look at gear/optics when I need/want something new. I kind of stumbled on the Mk4HD. After a little bit of research, should I be worried about QC on the Mk4HD vs the Delta? Returning a Leupold for warranty out of the box would be a pita from Europe.
Click to expand...
That's a tough call. For hunting in low light, I would lean toward the Mk4HD by a little bit. For overall use, I like the Delta a little more. I use clip-ons quite a bit, so the shorter Delta works better for my purposes.

ILya
 
  • Like
Reactions: tikka_rfn
#32
koshkin said:
That's a tough call. For hunting in low light, I would lean toward the Mk4HD by a little bit. For overall use, I like the Delta a little more. I use clip-ons quite a bit, so the shorter Delta works better for my purposes.

ILya
Click to expand...
Thanks for the feedback. Clip-on NV/Thermal?

Requires a licence where I live, would use one for Foxes if not for that.
 
#34
Last question before I make my mind up, if anyone would like to weigh in.

Current scope
PST Gen 2 5-25 - MSRP $1500

New Options
Stryker HD 3.5-21X44 MSRP $2180
(This one is a little off as I just converted Złoty to USD, I've found it for $1590 online in the US and also I won't be paying the equivelant in Euro)
Leupold Mark 4HD 4.5-18 msrp $1599

(I've just used the msrp for comparison)

I guess my question is, given the price point of the 2 options I am looking at, am I upgrading from my PST GEN 2 with either the Stryker or Mark 4HD or am I spending a lot of money, a lot to me anyways, and not really upgrading.

And by upgrading I guess Im talking in terms of glass quality, like CA, IQ, DOF etc, theres features on both Stryker and Mk4hd I would consider better than my PST, e.g. locking windage, but mostly I dont want to spend moeny to end up with similar glass quality I guess.
 
#37
I doubt you'll find better comparative thoughts than koshkin's above. Other than that, there may be too much subjectivity in "better glass" for one person's eyes compared to another's.

I've looked through the Mk4 HD and Mk5 HD Leupolds and did so before buying the Stryker, was not disappointed in any way optically after getting the Stryker w/o looking through it. But the Leupolds are lighter weight.

Wish I'd looked through one of what you are currently using, but I have no experience with Vortex.

I trusted the Stryker would be good since koshkin vouched for it and since I already had 1-6x Stryker LPVO and found its glass, reticle, etc very nice. That scope, also, bought due to koshkin's POV on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tikka_rfn
#38
flogxal said:
I doubt you'll find better comparative thoughts than koshkin's above. Other than that, there may be too much subjectivity in "better glass" for one person's eyes compared to another's.

I've looked through the Mk4 HD and Mk5 HD Leupolds and did so before buying the Stryker, was not disappointed in any way optically after getting the Stryker w/o looking through it. But the Leupolds are lighter weight.

Wish I'd looked through one of what you are currently using, but I have no experience with Vortex.

I trusted the Stryker would be good since koshkin vouched for it and since I already had 1-6x Stryker LPVO and found its glass, reticle, etc very nice. That scope, also, bought due to koshkin's POV on it.
Click to expand...
We all have different eyes, so perceptions can be a little different.

Still, I've lost count of how many scopes go through here in any given year. They come and go. Some stay. The 3.5-21x44 stayed and gets used quite a bit.

I test rifles and optics all the time. I also go spend time at the range when I am not testing anything simply because I like doing and enjoy the practice. The 3.5-21x44 Stryker sits on one of the rifles I shoot simply because I enjoy doing it.

ILya
 
  • Like
Reactions: tikka_rfn and flogxal
#39
flogxal said:
I doubt you'll find better comparative thoughts than koshkin's above. Other than that, there may be too much subjectivity in "better glass" for one person's eyes compared to another's.

I've looked through the Mk4 HD and Mk5 HD Leupolds and did so before buying the Stryker, was not disappointed in any way optically after getting the Stryker w/o looking through it. But the Leupolds are lighter weight.

Wish I'd looked through one of what you are currently using, but I have no experience with Vortex.

I trusted the Stryker would be good since koshkin vouched for it and since I already had 1-6x Stryker LPVO and found its glass, reticle, etc very nice. That scope, also, bought due to koshkin's POV on it.
Click to expand...
I suppose what I meant was given the msrp of the 2 scopes, and my Vortex, was the glass of a higher quality as in the actual lenses themselves or was I about to spend money to get the same quality. Or to put it another way is the Delta or the Leupold better than what I have now?

Ive watched the review koshkin posted in thread and found one he did on the Leupold, and went down a rabbit hole of reviews he has done. I get now the weight his opinion carries.

I appreciate all the feedback so far, Id say I have the money to spend, I just dont have it twice so I need all the bang for my buck( or euro) I can get, if that makes sense.

I guess I am in a bad position in that I can't compare either scope to my vortex in person, I can only go off of reviews and specs/features. I could drop the money I have now on a Zeiss V6 3-18x50 and I know its better than the PST, but I dont like moa, sfp and its not illuminated. Theres a small subset in Ireland using mil/mil ffp scopes, and I dont have Kahles money, most use moa/sfp for hunting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flogxal
#40
koshkin said:
We all have different eyes, so perceptions can be a little different.

Still, I've lost count of how many scopes go through here in any given year. They come and go. Some stay. The 3.5-21x44 stayed and gets used quite a bit.

I test rifles and optics all the time. I also go spend time at the range when I am not testing anything simply because I like doing and enjoy the practice. The 3.5-21x44 Stryker sits on one of the rifles I shoot simply because I enjoy doing it.

ILya
Click to expand...

That's fair enough @koshkin. It must be good if you hung on to it. I understand what you're saying, I've had the vortex 5 years now, shot comps, only a few, and hunted with it, it's grand( as we'd say), I'm just looking to upgrade what I have now. The vortex isn't going anywhere it's going on a .22, I'm just looking to get a better scope for hunting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flogxal
#41
I don't blame you for hesitating/double checking, but it sounds like you are at the "fish or cut bait?" stage and just have to make the call.

Despite the point of subjectivity, "everyone's eyes different", koshkin spends a lot more time with different scopes than the average shooter, and given his history of doing that, I would say he can give you good comparisons regardless. At a certain volume of scopes compared, the subjectivity point is not as big an issue, I think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
SOLD Delta Stryker 3.5-21x44 MRAD DLR-1
Replies
9
Views
989
Lowhighlander
L
C
Rifle Scopes Brand NEW, Just in Delta Optical Stryker 1-10X28 and 3.5-21X44 Authorized Dealer and Warranty Station darnfineshot.com 812-917-5653
Replies
1
Views
408
Maurygold
M
C
Optics Brand NEW, Just in Delta Optical Stryker 1-10X28 and 3.5-21X44 Authorized Dealer and Warranty Station darnfineshot.com 812-917-5653
Replies
0
Views
212
Charles Follett
C
Glassaholic
SOLD Delta Stryker 3.5-21x44 DPRC-1 mrad tree reticle
Replies
5
Views
952
Glassaholic
Glassaholic
B
SOLD Swaro z6i 1-6, Delta 3.5-21 and burris xtr3 3.3-18 scr2 mil
Replies
4
Views
524
Bart
B
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts