Sold it, went through a 3-12 and 4.5-18 LRHS and am happily back with an XTR II 4-20.
Just curious, what didn't you like about the LRHS?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Sold it, went through a 3-12 and 4.5-18 LRHS and am happily back with an XTR II 4-20.
Just curious, what didn't you like about the LRHS?
I myself have been considering the XTR II for my RPR in 308. While I'm still kind of new to the long range shooting community, I have a Gen 1 Razor on my 700 and have been very happy with it. For you guys that have experience with the XTR II and Gen 1 Razor how do they compare with one another?
I liked the 3-12 overall, but needed more magnification. The 4.5-18 had a more fussy eyebox. I'm 60 years old and at this point brighter is more important than a lot of other traits. 30MM vs 34MM tubes, 44MM vs 50MM objectives and non-illiminated vs illuminated made the difference for me. Plus the eyebox/eye relief are more forgiving and I got more mils of elevation adjustment, especially over the 4.5-14. And lastly, I like the SCR reticle better than the Bushnell. At this stage, my eyes couldn't really tell much, if any, difference in the glass quality. I like the clicks on the Burris. The Bushnell felt more rounded over and easier to overshoot my adjustments. The LRHS's are really nice scopes, just not what I need for my type of shooting.
The Burris gets a bad rap for glass here on the Hide. 99% of the time the scope it's being compared to costs $500 or more then the Burris.
That is a very true, and the glass is pretty much all the $500 gets you over the Burris. Congrats on the good match!
My Burris XTR II 4-20 glass was shit, but this is compared to an ATACR F1 and a gen 2 Razor... Not really a fair comparison... I might try one of the Athlon Cronus BTR's real soon...
The Burris gets a bad rap for glass here on the Hide. 99% of the time the scope it's being compared to costs $500 or more then the Burris.
That is a very true, and the glass is pretty much all the $500 gets you over the Burris. Congrats on the good match!
Much appreciated SD...
I've looked through the Cronus Jstuck, and I personally think they did a very good job with the glass on that scope. I've heard folks say it's Gen II Razor quality, but to my eye it's not quite there. But it's less money than the Razor, so it's relative. There were things I didn't care for on the Cronus, but I won't nitpick the scope. I think it's a good offering from Athlon.
I think the guys that are looking for "great" glass in an optic are well served by saving up for the Gen II Razor/Kahles/ATACR price point scope. I see differences in glass quality in sub 2k scopes, but to my eye, nothing pops so well that I would pay extra for it. If the XTR II werent an option, I would put my money on a T5Xi, or one of the new offerings from Bushnell in the sub 2k price point. Bushnell always produces a scope with solid tracking. And the T5Xi is an excellent scope in this price range.
Just my two bits.
I ordered a 4-20x50 XTR II today! I am looking forward to getting it in and running it on a 6.5x47L
You wont be disappointed with the 4-20X50 XTR II. I own that as well as the 5-25X50 XTR II. I have no complaints with either of them. I own 7 Nightforce scopes 6 NXS's and 1 ATACR and 7 Bushnell Tactical Elites. 4 DMR's and 3 ERS's all 3.5-21x50. Is the XTR II's overall quality as god as either the Nightforce or Bushnell scopes, no but they are not far behind. At least to my eyes.