GLX 2.5-10 vs Credo 2-10 vs PST Gen II vs PLXc 1-8 vs Razor Gen III 1-10 ?

[kyjd75]

I am curious how this goes!



2. Good to know. I'm curious if smcfarland has the same issue or if yours was maybe a bit of a dud?


I've watched both of his reviews on the Credo. He seemed much happier with the second one than the first one that he sent back. I just wish I had somewhere to go that had all of these for me to compare them myself, but I just don't live in an area that is particularly conducive to large ranges of stock on stuff.

I've never used a piggyback, so this is all a bit of an experiment tbh. Just trying to bump my odds to get a setup I like. One definitive advantage that all 2-10s are going to have is the larger objective lens doing a better job at gathering light to allow for use in darker conditions. The importance of parallax is a bit of an unknown for me as I've only ever owned one other scope with the adjustment being available.
As far as longer distance stuff, I really just want to have good enough glass to be able to know what I am shooting at out at 600 yds. I know you can make accurate enough shots at that distance with far lower magnification.

This video was a pretty interesting one:
In it, it looks like the GLX and the GEN3 are actually rather close in glass, but the brighter image on the GLX make it potentially more useful for information gathering at distance.


Oh man, I wish that one of those March scopes was only a "little more". I like them a lot, but they just aren't in the cards based on cost.

NF NXS 2-10 is SFP and the NX8s are just too heavy.


Have you ever done a direct comparison between the PLxC and the GEN3? I checked your YT and didn't see one. I need to watch the individual videos though. Could you summarize your opinion between the two though? I know the PLxC is 20%-ish lighter and has the ACSS reticle which seems nice for use without lume. Idk how long the GEN3 lume lasts, but IIRC, it doesn't have the battery-saving auto on/off like the PLxC does either... LOTS of thoughts.

Sorry, can you please explain the highlighted part? I'll watch your video on reticle illumination at some point, but a TLDR would be greatly appreciated.
Right, the reticle, parallax adjustment, turrets, and price are what set the GLx apart from the Credo for me. I certainly like the idea of Trijicon over a GLx, but, ultimately, .

I appreciate the recommendation for the Warhawk, but it's pretty heavy, like you said. I would also like to keep out of china-made optics if I can help it. (Holosun is kind of the exception because I just can't stomach Trijicon dots for what they ACTUALLY bring to the table in comparison).


Yep, and he seemed to like the replacement quite a lot better.



Yep, I watched the B&H reviews for the Credo and the GLx. They were really the only reason I was still considering the Credo at this point. I can certainly appreciate the counterpoint to adjustable parallax being that the Credo is faster to engage, but you can also just leave the GLx in whatever setting is near the average expected range. I know he ran into issues with the locking elevation turret, but I am looking at the SCRS rather than a full-sized dot.



Any chance you've been able to use a piggyback to compare to the scope's 1X?



Sorry, are you running the Credo? You pretty much hit the nail on the head for the NXS and Mk5 for me, besides the reticle on the Mk5 not being a favorite of mine.

Yes (see my initial post). I am running the Credo 2-10X36 with the Mrad reticle. Geissele mount.

 

[tucaz]

I am curious how this goes!



2. Good to know. I'm curious if smcfarland has the same issue or if yours was maybe a bit of a dud?


I've watched both of his reviews on the Credo. He seemed much happier with the second one than the first one that he sent back. I just wish I had somewhere to go that had all of these for me to compare them myself, but I just don't live in an area that is particularly conducive to large ranges of stock on stuff.

I've never used a piggyback, so this is all a bit of an experiment tbh. Just trying to bump my odds to get a setup I like. One definitive advantage that all 2-10s are going to have is the larger objective lens doing a better job at gathering light to allow for use in darker conditions. The importance of parallax is a bit of an unknown for me as I've only ever owned one other scope with the adjustment being available.
As far as longer distance stuff, I really just want to have good enough glass to be able to know what I am shooting at out at 600 yds. I know you can make accurate enough shots at that distance with far lower magnification.

This video was a pretty interesting one:
In it, it looks like the GLX and the GEN3 are actually rather close in glass, but the brighter image on the GLX make it potentially more useful for information gathering at distance.


Oh man, I wish that one of those March scopes was only a "little more". I like them a lot, but they just aren't in the cards based on cost.

NF NXS 2-10 is SFP and the NX8s are just too heavy.


Have you ever done a direct comparison between the PLxC and the GEN3? I checked your YT and didn't see one. I need to watch the individual videos though. Could you summarize your opinion between the two though? I know the PLxC is 20%-ish lighter and has the ACSS reticle which seems nice for use without lume. Idk how long the GEN3 lume lasts, but IIRC, it doesn't have the battery-saving auto on/off like the PLxC does either... LOTS of thoughts.

Sorry, can you please explain the highlighted part? I'll watch your video on reticle illumination at some point, but a TLDR would be greatly appreciated.
Right, the reticle, parallax adjustment, turrets, and price are what set the GLx apart from the Credo for me. I certainly like the idea of Trijicon over a GLx, but, ultimately, .

I appreciate the recommendation for the Warhawk, but it's pretty heavy, like you said. I would also like to keep out of china-made optics if I can help it. (Holosun is kind of the exception because I just can't stomach Trijicon dots for what they ACTUALLY bring to the table in comparison).


Yep, and he seemed to like the replacement quite a lot better.



Yep, I watched the B&H reviews for the Credo and the GLx. They were really the only reason I was still considering the Credo at this point. I can certainly appreciate the counterpoint to adjustable parallax being that the Credo is faster to engage, but you can also just leave the GLx in whatever setting is near the average expected range. I know he ran into issues with the locking elevation turret, but I am looking at the SCRS rather than a full-sized dot.



Any chance you've been able to use a piggyback to compare to the scope's 1X?



Sorry, are you running the Credo? You pretty much hit the nail on the head for the NXS and Mk5 for me, besides the reticle on the Mk5 not being a favorite of mine.

i havent piggybacked a RD on the vx6hd 1-6 but it most definitely has a slight magnification at 1x.

the only time i notice it is indoors if i move around the house with it or outside at 30/40 feet or less

i’ve only used RMR’s on ACOG’s.

 

[smcfarland]

Received the SWFA yesterday and mounted it, but will be a few weeks until I can put through its paces on steel to 600. Initial impressions:
1. LIGHT! Holy crap is it lightweight. Noticeably lighter setup than with the PA SLX 1-6.
2. Turrets seem pretty decent for price. Not a lot of purchase for adjusting but crisp.
3. Reticle seems good enough. Need to play more with it in StrelokPro (if there) to see how lines up with my 11.5 in 5.56.
4. Glass is just meh. At 10x I can see the light sensitivity mentioned by others. Eyebox isn’t awesome but not terrible either.

Truthfully it’s probably good enough for my purposes. If tracks well and performs on steel next time I go out, I’ll probably leave it on. For <$300 I can likely make it work. This is primarily a night gun and just wanted some basic capabilities during the daytime if needed.

 

[dgheriani]

I've actually been comparing a Razor Gen 3 1-10 to a PST Gen 2 2-10 on 2 similar gas guns lately (both with offset red dots for night shooting). To me, which optic (or optic type:LPVO vs MPVO) you use is really a matter of how you want to bias the use of your carbine.

For more of a GP rifle, the 1-10 is awesome: the 1x is great, illum is great, it's fast on 1x and having 10x on tap for PID and a nice Xmas tree reticle for the longer shots is super helpful.

For more of a SPR-kinda rifle, the 2-10 is great: the larger ocular makes it at least as bright as the 1-10 on 10x, it has a larger FOV at 10x, adjustable parallax and a less fussy eyebox at 10x. Obviously not as ideal at 2x but usable and the offset dot just becomes the go to inside 100 yards. The simpler reticle, combined with the ability to dial for longer shots makes it a bit easier to spot the small splash from .223 at longer ranges. I'd rather it have locking turrets but such is life.

How much these differences matter to you and how you prioritize them comes down to how you most intend to use the rifle and also your terrain. It's a much different task to engage IPSC size targets out to 600 when they're in the open on a flat range than it is to engage 2/3 IPSCs (or smaller) that can be obscured by foliage, rocks, in the shadows, etc. To me, the real benefit of something with 10x on the top end when compared to a 1-6 or similar is that it allows you to better PID and hold on less obvious targets.

 

[Jazz30-06]

I've actually been comparing a Razor Gen 3 1-10 to a PST Gen 2 2-10 on 2 similar gas guns lately (both with offset red dots for night shooting). To me, which optic (or optic type:LPVO vs MPVO) you use is really a matter of how you want to bias the use of your carbine.

For more of a GP rifle, the 1-10 is awesome: the 1x is great, illum is great, it's fast on 1x and having 10x on tap for PID and a nice Xmas tree reticle for the longer shots is super helpful.

For more of a SPR-kinda rifle, the 2-10 is great: the larger ocular makes it at least as bright as the 1-10 on 10x, it has a larger FOV at 10x, adjustable parallax and a less fussy eyebox at 10x. Obviously not as ideal at 2x but usable and the offset dot just becomes the go to inside 100 yards. The simpler reticle, combined with the ability to dial for longer shots makes it a bit easier to spot the small splash from .223 at longer ranges. I'd rather it have locking turrets but such is life.

How much these differences matter to you and how you prioritize them comes down to how you most intend to use the rifle and also your terrain. It's a much different task to engage IPSC size targets out to 600 when they're in the open on a flat range than it is to engage 2/3 IPSCs (or smaller) that can be obscured by foliage, rocks, in the shadows, etc. To me, the real benefit of something with 10x on the top end when compared to a 1-6 or similar is that it allows you to better PID and hold on less obvious targets.

This is precisely what I've been getting at trying to find the answer to. I live in the mountains with lots of foliage. There can be very long PID involved with the use of the rifle. How have to found the dots compare with night shooting, if any different between the two scopes? Is the 2X really THAT big of a disadvantage for close-ish shots when compared to the 1X or does having the dot make up for the difference in zoom? I know lots of people just run prisms at a set 2X or 4X and really like them. How much difference, really, have you noticed between something like that and the bottom of a 2-10? How much difference would you say there is in light gathering in low-light conditions?

 

[beetroot]

I've actually been comparing a Razor Gen 3 1-10 to a PST Gen 2 2-10 on 2 similar gas guns lately (both with offset red dots for night shooting). To me, which optic (or optic type:LPVO vs MPVO) you use is really a matter of how you want to bias the use of your carbine.

For more of a GP rifle, the 1-10 is awesome: the 1x is great, illum is great, it's fast on 1x and having 10x on tap for PID and a nice Xmas tree reticle for the longer shots is super helpful.

For more of a SPR-kinda rifle, the 2-10 is great: the larger ocular makes it at least as bright as the 1-10 on 10x, it has a larger FOV at 10x, adjustable parallax and a less fussy eyebox at 10x. Obviously not as ideal at 2x but usable and the offset dot just becomes the go to inside 100 yards. The simpler reticle, combined with the ability to dial for longer shots makes it a bit easier to spot the small splash from .223 at longer ranges. I'd rather it have locking turrets but such is life.

How much these differences matter to you and how you prioritize them comes down to how you most intend to use the rifle and also your terrain. It's a much different task to engage IPSC size targets out to 600 when they're in the open on a flat range than it is to engage 2/3 IPSCs (or smaller) that can be obscured by foliage, rocks, in the shadows, etc. To me, the real benefit of something with 10x on the top end when compared to a 1-6 or similar is that it allows you to better PID and hold on less obvious targets.

If you are going to be using the red dot inside of 100yards, is it really necessary to have a low end of 2x?
Why not step up to a 3-12/15/18 which would be even better at 600yards, considering the weight of the PST 2-10 there wouldn't be much of a weight penalty either.

 

[Quintus]

I've compared the Viper, Credo and NXS side by side. They're all great SPR scopes and each have their pros and cons, I can give you a short breakdown of my experience with each and you can AMA.

Credo 2-10x36:

Best reticle in its class, IMO. Not too heavy. Glass is good, clear, good resolution. It has a capped windage turret, which is nice, I wish more scopes had this. The lack of parallax is not a hinderance at all (it's only a 36mm objective anyway.) The diopter seems a little finicky, but once its set correctly you should have no image problems from 100 to infinity.

Viper PST Gen II: 2-10x32:

Simple reticle, very clean and bright illumination that works very well at dusk. On the heavy side of its class, and it is noticeable. Glass is decent, resolution is good. The parallax and illumination knobs can be very stiff to turn and the aggressive knurling digs into your skin if you adjust a lot. It has a large ocular, with large FoV and is fairly easy to get behind.

NXS 2.5-10x42:

Good reticle, especially for ranging, but only SFP. Glass is the clearest and brightest out of the three (though the Credo is pretty close) and resolution is very good. The turrets feel the best out of the three. The parallax knob moves smooth as butter and produces a very clear target image inside 100 and beyond and the scope is very easy to get behind. Also, the lightest in its class. Overall, the NXS is a very nice scope, but pricey compared to the other options.

As a side note, unfortunately, the first one I bought had an off-center reticle and was sent in for a replacement, and the second one I received had the same problem. And I've seen others in the wild with the same off-center ret, YMMV. For a $1600 scope, I was very surprised to get two in a row like that.

 

[tucaz]

I've compared the Viper, Credo and NXS side by side. They're all great SPR scopes and each have their pros and cons, I can give you a short breakdown of my experience with each and you can AMA.

Credo 2-10x36:

Best reticle in its class, IMO. Not too heavy. Glass is good, clear, good resolution. It has a capped windage turret, which is nice, I wish more scopes had this. The lack of parallax is not a hinderance at all (it's only a 36mm objective anyway.) The diopter seems a little finicky, but once its set correctly you should have no image problems from 100 to infinity.

Viper PST Gen II: 2-10x32:

Simple reticle, very clean and bright illumination that works very well at dusk. On the heavy side of its class, and it is noticeable. Glass is decent, resolution is good. The parallax and illumination knobs can be very stiff to turn and the aggressive knurling digs into your skin if you adjust a lot. It has a large ocular, with large FoV and is fairly easy to get behind.

NXS 2.5-10x42:

Good reticle, especially for ranging, but only SFP. Glass is the clearest and brightest out of the three (though the Credo is pretty close) and resolution is very good. The turrets feel the best out of the three. The parallax knob moves smooth as butter and produces a very clear target image inside 100 and beyond and the scope is very easy to get behind. Also, the lightest in its class. Overall, the NXS is a very nice scope, but pricey compared to the other options.

As a side note, unfortunately, the first one I bought had an off-center reticle and was sent in for a replacement, and the second one I received had the same problem. And I've seen others in the wild with the same off-center ret, YMMV. For a $1600 scope, I was very surprised to get two in a row like that.

which one had the off center reticle?

and nice comparison.

 

[Quintus]

which one had the off center reticle?

and nice comparison.

Thanks, it was the NXS.

 

[dgheriani]

This is precisely what I've been getting at trying to find the answer to. I live in the mountains with lots of foliage. There can be very long PID involved with the use of the rifle. How have to found the dots compare with night shooting, if any different between the two scopes? Is the 2X really THAT big of a disadvantage for close-ish shots when compared to the 1X or does having the dot make up for the difference in zoom? I know lots of people just run prisms at a set 2X or 4X and really like them. How much difference, really, have you noticed between something like that and the bottom of a 2-10? How much difference would you say there is in light gathering in low-light conditions?

I live in the mountains with lots of foliage as well (PNW) so possibly a similar use case. I also have a Bushy Elite 1-8.5 SMRS for comparison. The 10x on the Razor g3 and PST is much better for PID and just resolving hidden targets than 8.5x (although I've also shot with the SMRS out to my 625 yard targets with success). I actually notice the advantage of 10x more when shooting at some targets that I have from 380 to 465 but that are either partially obscured by veg, in the shadow of large trees or both.

The dots are both on Arisaka offset mounts (an Acro and an H1) so using them is pretty much identical. I don't have nods (yet) but shoot them at night with a wml. I've found I much prefer using an offset red dot with a wml than looking through a tube optic as I can just straight up see better/more. I might have to move them to a piggyback position for use with nods but will try it as is first.

As for the speed difference between 1x and 2x for close shots, it totally depends on your use case. 1x will always be faster, the Gen 3 is basically like using a red dot but 2x is still totally usable. I don't have much prism experience to compare to but have used a 3x Elcan quite a bit. I just find it easier shooting up close with as close to 1x as possible.

I need to do some more comparing between the 1-10 and 2-10 with regards to low light conditions but I'm currently waiting on a new carbine for the 2-10 so I can stop swapping things around.

 

[dgheriani]

If you are going to be using the red dot inside of 100yards, is it really necessary to have a low end of 2x?
Why not step up to a 3-12/15/18 which would be even better at 600yards, considering the weight of the PST 2-10 there wouldn't be much of a weight penalty either.

You're not wrong in that a 3-12/15/18 might be a better fit, to be honest. For comparison's sake, the PST 3-15 is about 2oz heavier and 1.5" longer. I've got a ton of experience on 3-12 Bushy Elite LRTSis (still have one on a 6.5 gasser) and honestly think they're an almost perfect gas gun optic. The LRTSi is also about 2oz heavier than the PST 2-10 and a lil longer as well (can't remember the specs). The NX8 2.5-20 would be a great option as well (I used to have one and quite liked it), same 28oz weight as the PST 3-15 and LRTSi 3-12 but same short length as the PST 2-10. At the end of the day, there are a ton of ways to slice this and no "perfect" optic, imo. It's all a compromise of sorts.

I was just really interested in comparing 2 scopes (1-10 and 2-10) with the same top end mag on very similar rifles (which are both about 1.5-2moa guns). On a "precision" gas gun, I think a bit more mag is called for and would go with a 3-12/15/18.

 

[BCP]

The LRTSi is also about 2oz heavier than the PST 2-10

Vortex used to make a PST 2.5-10x32mm in the older lineup that was great for an AR15. Had parallax adjustment, illumination, weight about 1lb. But then they quit making it in favor of the PST II lineup that is more expensive and weighs a lot more.

 

[dgheriani]

Vortex used to make a PST 2.5-10x32mm in the older lineup that was great for an AR15. Had parallax adjustment, illumination, weight about 1lb. But then they quit making it in favor of the PST II lineup that is more expensive and weighs a lot more.

Yeah, that sounds like a pretty ideal scope for an AR. Was it FFP?

I'd love to see something in a 2-10 with locking turrets (like the LRTSi) or locking elevation and capped windage (like the LHT 4.5-22) with a simple, illuminated reticle (like the PST gen 2) but as light (or lighter) than the LHT 4.5-22 (22oz) and short (<12"). Now that I look at the specs, that's basically the new Mk5 2-10. Might just have to get behind one as I always liked the 5-25. Leupold's upcharge for illum is ridiculous though...

 

[beetroot]

Yeah, that sounds like a pretty ideal scope for an AR. Was it FFP?

I'd love to see something in a 2-10 with locking turrets (like the LRTSi) or locking elevation and capped windage (like the LHT 4.5-22) with a simple, illuminated reticle (like the PST gen 2) but as light (or lighter) than the LHT 4.5-22 (22oz) and short (<12"). Now that I look at the specs, that's basically the new Mk5 2-10. Might just have to get behind one as I always liked the 5-25. Leupold's upcharge for illum is ridiculous though...

Yes the PST 2.5-10x32 was FFP, I've got one and it's one of my favorite scopes.
The eyebox and FOV isn't as good as the Gen2 PSTs but other than that it holds up well against newer scopes.

Its weighs 19oz which these days is pretty light weight.

 

[tucaz]

Yeah, that sounds like a pretty ideal scope for an AR. Was it FFP?

I'd love to see something in a 2-10 with locking turrets (like the LRTSi) or locking elevation and capped windage (like the LHT 4.5-22) with a simple, illuminated reticle (like the PST gen 2) but as light (or lighter) than the LHT 4.5-22 (22oz) and short (<12"). Now that I look at the specs, that's basically the new Mk5 2-10. Might just have to get behind one as I always liked the 5-25. Leupold's upcharge for illum is ridiculous though...

the leupy vx6hd 2-12 might fit that. no paralax adjustment but i havent had a problem on 14” steel at 600. they are spendy though.

that scope is on a bolt action for now.

the vx5hd 2-10 has locking with zero stop elevation and capped windaged. no paralax

 

[RKBArmory]

The Vortex Viper PST Gen II FFP 3-15 fits many of your criteria. With the piggybacked red dot, I think you would be fine with 3X on the low end.

Here's a good deal on one, from our shop.

 

[Jazz30-06]

I've compared the Viper, Credo and NXS side by side. They're all great SPR scopes and each have their pros and cons, I can give you a short breakdown of my experience with each and you can AMA.

Credo 2-10x36:

Best reticle in its class, IMO. Not too heavy. Glass is good, clear, good resolution. It has a capped windage turret, which is nice, I wish more scopes had this. The lack of parallax is not a hinderance at all (it's only a 36mm objective anyway.) The diopter seems a little finicky, but once its set correctly you should have no image problems from 100 to infinity.

Viper PST Gen II: 2-10x32:

Simple reticle, very clean and bright illumination that works very well at dusk. On the heavy side of its class, and it is noticeable. Glass is decent, resolution is good. The parallax and illumination knobs can be very stiff to turn and the aggressive knurling digs into your skin if you adjust a lot. It has a large ocular, with large FoV and is fairly easy to get behind.

NXS 2.5-10x42:

Good reticle, especially for ranging, but only SFP. Glass is the clearest and brightest out of the three (though the Credo is pretty close) and resolution is very good. The turrets feel the best out of the three. The parallax knob moves smooth as butter and produces a very clear target image inside 100 and beyond and the scope is very easy to get behind. Also, the lightest in its class. Overall, the NXS is a very nice scope, but pricey compared to the other options.

As a side note, unfortunately, the first one I bought had an off-center reticle and was sent in for a replacement, and the second one I received had the same problem. And I've seen others in the wild with the same off-center ret, YMMV. For a $1600 scope, I was very surprised to get two in a row like that.

Great comparison, thank you! Out of these three, it sounds like the Credo is the winner with the relatively light weight, nearly the best glass, reasonable price, and FFP.

I live in the mountains with lots of foliage as well (PNW) so possibly a similar use case. I also have a Bushy Elite 1-8.5 SMRS for comparison. The 10x on the Razor g3 and PST is much better for PID and just resolving hidden targets than 8.5x (although I've also shot with the SMRS out to my 625 yard targets with success). I actually notice the advantage of 10x more when shooting at some targets that I have from 380 to 465 but that are either partially obscured by veg, in the shadow of large trees or both.

The dots are both on Arisaka offset mounts (an Acro and an H1) so using them is pretty much identical. I don't have nods (yet) but shoot them at night with a wml. I've found I much prefer using an offset red dot with a wml than looking through a tube optic as I can just straight up see better/more. I might have to move them to a piggyback position for use with nods but will try it as is first.

As for the speed difference between 1x and 2x for close shots, it totally depends on your use case. 1x will always be faster, the Gen 3 is basically like using a red dot but 2x is still totally usable. I don't have much prism experience to compare to but have used a 3x Elcan quite a bit. I just find it easier shooting up close with as close to 1x as possible.

I need to do some more comparing between the 1-10 and 2-10 with regards to low light conditions but I'm currently waiting on a new carbine for the 2-10 so I can stop swapping things around.

Your use case is the same as mine. When you talk about resolving hidden targets, you mentioned the G3 and the PST. Are you saying the PST is much better or that they are both better than the SMRS?

Have you used any of these in a piggyback config, or have they always been using the offset mount?

This is more or less what I had expected in terms of the somewhat insignificant difference in speed between 1X and 3X when you have the dot as an option.

I would LOVE to see a comparison between the 1-10 and the 2-10 in low light when using a relatively similar glass quality.

You're not wrong in that a 3-12/15/18 might be a better fit, to be honest. For comparison's sake, the PST 3-15 is about 2oz heavier and 1.5" longer. I've got a ton of experience on 3-12 Bushy Elite LRTSis (still have one on a 6.5 gasser) and honestly think they're an almost perfect gas gun optic. The LRTSi is also about 2oz heavier than the PST 2-10 and a lil longer as well (can't remember the specs). The NX8 2.5-20 would be a great option as well (I used to have one and quite liked it), same 28oz weight as the PST 3-15 and LRTSi 3-12 but same short length as the PST 2-10. At the end of the day, there are a ton of ways to slice this and no "perfect" optic, imo. It's all a compromise of sorts.

I was just really interested in comparing 2 scopes (1-10 and 2-10) with the same top end mag on very similar rifles (which are both about 1.5-2moa guns). On a "precision" gas gun, I think a bit more mag is called for and would go with a 3-12/15/18.

I think the NX8 will be towards the top of the list for my Grendal when I finally get that put together. Well, that along with an Optika 3-18. I think they are both just a bit too heavy for this application though. I'm really shooting for something more toward that 22oz mark for this rifle, as it is intended for me to be able to hike with it and the extra 6oz isn't nothing.

Vortex used to make a PST 2.5-10x32mm in the older lineup that was great for an AR15. Had parallax adjustment, illumination, weight about 1lb. But then they quit making it in favor of the PST II lineup that is more expensive and weighs a lot more.

Kind of unfortunate that the only ones I can find have a pretty limited reticle while still being fairly expensive. Thank you for recommendation though.

Yeah, that sounds like a pretty ideal scope for an AR. Was it FFP?

I'd love to see something in a 2-10 with locking turrets (like the LRTSi) or locking elevation and capped windage (like the LHT 4.5-22) with a simple, illuminated reticle (like the PST gen 2) but as light (or lighter) than the LHT 4.5-22 (22oz) and short (<12"). Now that I look at the specs, that's basically the new Mk5 2-10. Might just have to get behind one as I always liked the 5-25. Leupold's upcharge for illum is ridiculous though...

I really like the Mk5, but I just can't get past the reticle. I just don't want to have to dial and I just don't trust myself enough to make a shot without having a matrix to reference for position.

the leupy vx6hd 2-12 might fit that. no paralax adjustment but i havent had a problem on 14” steel at 600. they are spendy though.

that scope is on a bolt action for now.

the vx5hd 2-10 has locking with zero stop elevation and capped windaged. no paralax

Another one for, "probably great optics and form factor, but non-functional reticle for my purposes". Thank you for the recommendation though.

 

[dgheriani]

-The G3 and the PST 2-10 are both better than the SMRS at resolving hidden targets as they are both better/clearer at 10x than the SMRS is at 8.5x. The PST might actually be clearer than the G3 at 10x but I need to spend some more time behind them side by side to decide. It wouldn't surprise me a ton even though the G3 is a higher end scope, there's a lot more mechanical compromise with a 10x erector than a 5x, or at least that seems like a reasonable presumption and the PST has a larger objective.

-I haven't used the PST or G3 with a piggybacked red dot (only offset) but have used the LRTSi extensively with a piggy backed red dot and same for a NX8 and LHT 4.5-22. I find it easier to quickly get behind the offset red dot than the piggybacked red dot but if I find the offset doesn't work for me for NV then I'll just go back to a piggy back configuration and train it.

-I'll compare the G3 and PST in low light once my new carbine gets in so I can get a better idea of how they compare.

-I think the NX8 2.5-20 is a great optic for a grendel, arc or large frame AR

-I don't think the reticle choice on the Mk5 2-10 is a deal breaker. The illuminated TMR would be very usable (the reticle in the PST 2-10 is very similar with 0.5 and 1.0 mil hashes). I see having the ability to dial combined with a simple reticle (to make it easier to spot splash) as being one of the big advantages something like a 2-10 has over an LPVO for longer range enagements. Again, to me, it's how you want to bias the performance of the optic. A 1-10 with a tree reticle is still optimized for performance at close range on 1x but very usable at 10x whereas a 2-10 with a simple reticle but exposed turrets is more optimized for the longer range/smaller target shots. It's definitely easier to spot splash at 600yds with the 2-10 and your elevation dialled than it is when holding over with the 1-10 and trying to spot splash through the tree. It's also not hard to holdover with a simple reticle for those closer 2-3-400yd shots and past that I'd rather dial anyways.

 

[Quintus]

Great comparison, thank you! Out of these three, it sounds like the Credo is the winner with the relatively light weight, nearly the best glass, reasonable price, and FFP.

You're welcome. I would say so, especially if you want a tree style reticle.

I would LOVE to see a comparison between the 1-10 and the 2-10 in low light when using a relatively similar glass quality.

While not the same, I did compare the Viper PST Gen II 2-10x32 against the 3-15x44 model, basically identical scopes with different sized objectives and I can tell you that clarity wise, they were pretty close when both set at 10x, but the resolution on the 32mm suffers a little; I'm not able to resolve finer details unless I can keep my eye perfectly centered long enough. I see the image clearly (a sign at about 100- yards) and can read it, then the text fuzzes out as my eye shifts slightly out of the exit pupil. While I can read the sign with less effort on the 44mm objective at 10x. I had the scopes mounted SxS on a tripod for this test, so a cheek weld on a stock would probably help, but the exit pupil would still be a limiting factor for low light in a 1-10 vs 2-10.

I did the same low light test with the three MPVO's (also a 1-6 Brownells and Leupold just to see how they looked) and the NF was clearly the best performer, so if low light is most important, the NF is tops. But again, the Credo isn't too far off, and the PST is close behind the Credo. One thing about the PST though, I noticed it doesn't handle stray light sources very well, whenever it was aimed near and toward a streetlight (15 yards+-), the glass would produce haloing effects in the tube, even while wearing the sunshade. This is something I wasn't able to reproduce with any of the other scopes but was able to see the same effect through a cheap pair of Steiner binos (the 8x30 limited run amazon ones that look like Military-Marine 8x30 Steiner binos.)

I really like the Mk5, but I just can't get past the reticle. I just don't want to have to dial and I just don't trust myself enough to make a shot without having a matrix to reference for position.

The Credo or PA would be strong contenders for reticle choices, then. I have no experience with the PA though, mainly because I don't like the chevron style aiming point for precision shooting, so I never considered it. If it were available with the Athena style reticle, I'd buy one to try.

 

[WILLSMITH030382]

I have the pa plxc 1-8 griffin mil on a dd mk12 and a pa glx 2.5-10 griffin mil on a dd d5 v4 both with piggy back 509t. I can tell you that every time I look through the glx 2.5-10 it makes me smile more than the plxc 1-8 . The glx 2.5-10 is my favorite scope I own for the money. Although I wish the elevation turret was a little lower so that the 509t view was less obstructed. I am going to swap the 509t for a aimpoint t2 and see if this gives me a better sight picture for the piggy back.

 

[WILLSMITH030382]

I can post pics if anyone wants .

 

[WILLSMITH030382]

 

[WILLSMITH030382]

I went the 45 offset before and I may have to again with the glx setup due to the high elevation turret . But I was really hoping to go the piggy back route with the glx to keep the package streamlined and to use with nods for passive aiming. If you can't tell I really like the glx 2.5-10 for a gas gun out to 600 yds and in for my intended purposes which are hunting and self defense. IMHO I think it fits this role better than anything else available if you take size, weight, eye box, cost and overall performance into count.

 

[WILLSMITH030382]

I found a rmr plate with picatinny top rail to mount a micro red dot piggy back to the plx mount . It puts the micro red dot at the perfect piggy back height to use with the glx 2.5-10 ! I will post pics soon.
This is the link for the rmr plate if anyone want to go the sale set up.

 

[WILLSMITH030382]

 

[WILLSMITH030382]

I think this setup for a dmr style rifle might be the one to beat !

 

[Jazz30-06]

-The G3 and the PST 2-10 are both better than the SMRS at resolving hidden targets as they are both better/clearer at 10x than the SMRS is at 8.5x. The PST might actually be clearer than the G3 at 10x but I need to spend some more time behind them side by side to decide. It wouldn't surprise me a ton even though the G3 is a higher end scope, there's a lot more mechanical compromise with a 10x erector than a 5x, or at least that seems like a reasonable presumption and the PST has a larger objective.

-I haven't used the PST or G3 with a piggybacked red dot (only offset) but have used the LRTSi extensively with a piggy backed red dot and same for a NX8 and LHT 4.5-22. I find it easier to quickly get behind the offset red dot than the piggybacked red dot but if I find the offset doesn't work for me for NV then I'll just go back to a piggy back configuration and train it.

-I'll compare the G3 and PST in low light once my new carbine gets in so I can get a better idea of how they compare.

-I think the NX8 2.5-20 is a great optic for a grendel, arc or large frame AR

-I don't think the reticle choice on the Mk5 2-10 is a deal breaker. The illuminated TMR would be very usable (the reticle in the PST 2-10 is very similar with 0.5 and 1.0 mil hashes). I see having the ability to dial combined with a simple reticle (to make it easier to spot splash) as being one of the big advantages something like a 2-10 has over an LPVO for longer range enagements. Again, to me, it's how you want to bias the performance of the optic. A 1-10 with a tree reticle is still optimized for performance at close range on 1x but very usable at 10x whereas a 2-10 with a simple reticle but exposed turrets is more optimized for the longer range/smaller target shots. It's definitely easier to spot splash at 600yds with the 2-10 and your elevation dialled than it is when holding over with the 1-10 and trying to spot splash through the tree. It's also not hard to holdover with a simple reticle for those closer 2-3-400yd shots and past that I'd rather dial anyways.

Any chance you can expand on why the offset is "easier to get behind"? Offset for NV definitely seems to be a disadvantage from what I've found, hence the desire to look into a piggyback on what is really a GPR.

You make a good point about spotting splash and one that I hadn't thought much about before. I just don't know that I would want to be trying to dial on a rifle that is potentially going to require faster acquisitions, even out at longer ranges. Walking in with a tree sounds easier, but I've also never tried to spot splash from 5.56 at those distances.

You're welcome. I would say so, especially if you want a tree style reticle.



While not the same, I did compare the Viper PST Gen II 2-10x32 against the 3-15x44 model, basically identical scopes with different sized objectives and I can tell you that clarity wise, they were pretty close when both set at 10x, but the resolution on the 32mm suffers a little; I'm not able to resolve finer details unless I can keep my eye perfectly centered long enough. I see the image clearly (a sign at about 100- yards) and can read it, then the text fuzzes out as my eye shifts slightly out of the exit pupil. While I can read the sign with less effort on the 44mm objective at 10x. I had the scopes mounted SxS on a tripod for this test, so a cheek weld on a stock would probably help, but the exit pupil would still be a limiting factor for low light in a 1-10 vs 2-10.

I did the same low light test with the three MPVO's (also a 1-6 Brownells and Leupold just to see how they looked) and the NF was clearly the best performer, so if low light is most important, the NF is tops. But again, the Credo isn't too far off, and the PST is close behind the Credo. One thing about the PST though, I noticed it doesn't handle stray light sources very well, whenever it was aimed near and toward a streetlight (15 yards+-), the glass would produce haloing effects in the tube, even while wearing the sunshade. This is something I wasn't able to reproduce with any of the other scopes but was able to see the same effect through a cheap pair of Steiner binos (the 8x30 limited run amazon ones that look like Military-Marine 8x30 Steiner binos.)



The Credo or PA would be strong contenders for reticle choices, then. I have no experience with the PA though, mainly because I don't like the chevron style aiming point for precision shooting, so I never considered it. If it were available with the Athena style reticle, I'd buy one to try.

That sounds about right with the larger objective lense allowing for the better resolution. The exit pupil issue is certainly one that I've been aware of with a 1x vs a 2x+ bottom. It's one of the reasons I am looking at MPVO over LPVO.

Good to know about the PST! I never knew that would even be an issue.

The Credo and the PA are the two that I keep coming back to, all things considered. I like lots of other units for various reasons, but they seem to be some of the best total packages. Especially for the price.

I have the pa plxc 1-8 griffin mil on a dd mk12 and a pa glx 2.5-10 griffin mil on a dd d5 v4 both with piggy back 509t. I can tell you that every time I look through the glx 2.5-10 it makes me smile more than the plxc 1-8 . The glx 2.5-10 is my favorite scope I own for the money. Although I wish the elevation turret was a little lower so that the 509t view was less obstructed. I am going to swap the 509t for a aimpoint t2 and see if this gives me a better sight picture for the piggy back.

What mount are you using? I'm looking at using an SCRS once they get released, so hopefully, it'll be less of an issue for me.

I went the 45 offset before and I may have to again with the glx setup due to the high elevation turret . But I was really hoping to go the piggy back route with the glx to keep the package streamlined and to use with nods for passive aiming. If you can't tell I really like the glx 2.5-10 for a gas gun out to 600 yds and in for my intended purposes which are hunting and self defense. IMHO I think it fits this role better than anything else available if you take size, weight, eye box, cost and overall performance into count.

The only real gripe I have is that the thing is HUGE. But, I suppose it is what it is.

 

[dgheriani]

I find the offset red dot to be easier to get behind because your cheek weld is basically the same, the rifle is just canted. With a piggyback setup, you need to train for a chin weld. Just doesn't work as well for me. If the offset doesn't work well with NV, I'll go to piggyback and train for that chin weld but for now I'll stick to the offset mounts.

As to dialling vs holding over for "fast engagements" at distance, I dunno. As far as I see it, distance gives you time and opportunity so I'm happy to dial. There's a definite advantage in regards to seeing .223 splash if you aren't looking through a tree, especially at distance and in thicker veg.

 

[WILLSMITH030382]

I agree with it looking huge and hideous, but you know what they say " ugly is as ugly does"

 

[Jazz30-06]

I find the offset red dot to be easier to get behind because your cheek weld is basically the same, the rifle is just canted. With a piggyback setup, you need to train for a chin weld. Just doesn't work as well for me. If the offset doesn't work well with NV, I'll go to piggyback and train for that chin weld but for now I'll stick to the offset mounts.



As to dialling vs holding over for "fast engagements" at distance, I dunno. As far as I see it, distance gives you time and opportunity so I'm happy to dial. There's a definite advantage in regards to seeing .223 splash if you aren't looking through a tree, especially at distance and in thicker veg.

Yeah, the potentially good thing for me is that I haven't shot a TON yet, so I should be able to mostly build new good habits without having to break old ones necessarily.

As far as tree or no tree... you make some valid points that I need to think on a bit.

I agree with it looking huge and hideous, but you know what they say " ugly is as ugly does"

"If it fits it ships"

 

[tacoman69]

Great comparison, thank you! Out of these three, it sounds like the Credo is the winner with the relatively light weight, nearly the best glass, reasonable price, and FFP.

the credo and the nightforce will be way better than the others in terms of durability too

 

[Bluedog82]

I’ve got the new Strike Eagle 3-18x44 FFP with an offset red dot on my 18” 6ARC. I’ve only zeroed it so far but I’m happy with it and the SE is noticeably lighter than my Arken it replaced.

 

[dgheriani]

Yeah, the potentially good thing for me is that I haven't shot a TON yet, so I should be able to mostly build new good habits without having to break old ones necessarily.

As far as tree or no tree... you make some valid points that I need to think on a bit.

"If it fits it ships"

Shot under nods last night and having the red dot offset wasn't an issue but I think I might get the taller plate so the offset mount is more like a 1.93" (it's a 1.5" now). When my presentation was perfect, the dot was right there but my presentation wasn't always perfect, granted I was using a heavier 18" carbine so it is what it is.

 

[Jazz30-06]

the credo and the nightforce will be way better than the others in terms of durability too

I know they are certainly older names in the game and have a reputation, but it seems like it's probably a slight exaggeration that they are "way" better than other options. I can understand your viewpoint though.

I’ve got the new Strike Eagle 3-18x44 FFP with an offset red dot on my 18” 6ARC. I’ve only zeroed it so far but I’m happy with it and the SE is noticeably lighter than my Arken it replaced.

I have a Strike Eagle 1-6 right now, and I've never really been happy with the glass on it, hence the desire for something new.

Shot under nods last night and having the red dot offset wasn't an issue but I think I might get the taller plate so the offset mount is more like a 1.93" (it's a 1.5" now). When my presentation was perfect, the dot was right there but my presentation wasn't always perfect, granted I was using a heavier 18" carbine so it is what it is.

What are your impressions of the two positions in terms of broad target acquisition with the dot and then transitioning to glass for actual PIC or shooting?

 

[Bluedog82]

I know they are certainly older names in the game and have a reputation, but it seems like it's probably a slight exaggeration that they are "way" better than other options. I can understand your viewpoint though.

I have a Strike Eagle 1-6 right now, and I've never really been happy with the glass on it, hence the desire for something new.

What are your impressions of the two positions in terms of broad target acquisition with the dot and then transitioning to glass for actual PIC or shooting?

I believe that the higher mag FFP Strike Eagles use different glass than their LPVO counterparts. Many have put the glass quality in between the Gen 1 Viper and the Gen 2. To my eye the Gen 2 Viper narrowly edges out the Strike Eagle.

 

[WILLSMITH030382]

I have had a chance to play around with these setups a little more and here is what I have found.

I currently have a pa glx 2.5-10 , a pa plxc 1-8 and a vortex razor 1-10. They are all really nice scopes and all have their pros and cons.

PROS:
The glx 2.5-10 is the best value for the price , best max power performance, has parallax adjustment and best eye box.
The pa plxc 1-8 is the best overall package for size,weight and 1x power clarity.
The razor 1-10 has a little more forgiving eyebox than the plxc, better max magnified performance than the plxc and has a daylight bright reticle.

CONS:
The glx 2.5-10 elevation turret is too tall to piggy back a rmr style sight and see through. You need to use a riser and then you can't get a good chin weld.
The plxc 1-8 eye box is tight, you need to adjust the diopter at 1x and adjust it differently at 8x to get clarity and the reticle stadia could be a little thicker to pick up at 1x.
The razor 1-10 is heavy vs the plxc , doesn't have auto live illumination and the reticle is hard to use at 1x without illumination on.

Ultimately I would say the best overall pick would be the glx 2.5-10 of the three if primary arms would make a lower capped elevation turret so that it could be used with a standard height piggy back red dot sight. But since they don't the pa plxc 1-8 with a piggy back red dot is my top pick and would be the one I would choose for the end of days !

These are only my humble experiences and opinions. My context of use is for an ar15 556 and or ar10 308 to be used from 0-600 yards in hunting and defense scenarios.

 

[WILLSMITH030382]

If we can all make some noise @primaryarms and get them to make a lower profile glx 2.5-10 elevation capped turret I think it would be awesome!

 

[WILLSMITH030382]

I am also in the process of testing out a vortex razor lht 4.5-22 with a piggy back red dot on an AR style set up. With the scope being under 22 Oz and having a low enough elevation turret to piggy back a red dot without needing a riser it is seeming like a good option so far. The glass is really clear and the extra magnification could come in handy for identification at distances. The eyebox is good at 4.5x and up to 15x magnification. I like the reticle .

 

[S_R]

2.5 -10 NSX piggy RDS is bombproof, yada yada I need FFP. Maybe… only find using top magnification on it anyway pass 300 yards.

If really FFP requires then 4-14 F1 piggy RDS

Vortex if wish only to brag about how great their warranty is.

PLx 1-8 have really busy reticle.

LPVO doesn’t need RDS only if running NV with shitty laser that will fail.

My vote March 1-10 shorty

 

[TacticalPlinker]

Enjoying this thread.
FYI - G3 - SPUR (1.50) - RMR type 2 - TRex Arms offset combo is fits tight and compact together. Everything lines up well. KAC 5.56 upper

 

[Jazz30-06]

I believe that the higher mag FFP Strike Eagles use different glass than their LPVO counterparts. Many have put the glass quality in between the Gen 1 Viper and the Gen 2. To my eye the Gen 2 Viper narrowly edges out the Strike Eagle.

Good data point, thanks!

I have had a chance to play around with these setups a little more and here is what I have found.

I currently have a pa glx 2.5-10 , a pa plxc 1-8 and a vortex razor 1-10. They are all really nice scopes and all have their pros and cons.

PROS:
The glx 2.5-10 is the best value for the price , best max power performance, has parallax adjustment and best eye box.
The pa plxc 1-8 is the best overall package for size,weight and 1x power clarity.
The razor 1-10 has a little more forgiving eyebox than the plxc, better max magnified performance than the plxc and has a daylight bright reticle.

CONS:
The glx 2.5-10 elevation turret is too tall to piggy back a rmr style sight and see through. You need to use a riser and then you can't get a good chin weld.
The plxc 1-8 eye box is tight, you need to adjust the diopter at 1x and adjust it differently at 8x to get clarity and the reticle stadia could be a little thicker to pick up at 1x.
The razor 1-10 is heavy vs the plxc , doesn't have auto live illumination and the reticle is hard to use at 1x without illumination on.

Ultimately I would say the best overall pick would be the glx 2.5-10 of the three if primary arms would make a lower capped elevation turret so that it could be used with a standard height piggy back red dot sight. But since they don't the pa plxc 1-8 with a piggy back red dot is my top pick and would be the one I would choose for the end of days !

These are only my humble experiences and opinions. My context of use is for an ar15 556 and or ar10 308 to be used from 0-600 yards in hunting and defense scenarios.

Is the turret really that tall? I was thinking of using an SCRS anyway, so I wonder how much of a difference that would make with the turret height being an issue.

I am also in the process of testing out a vortex razor lht 4.5-22 with a piggy back red dot on an AR style set up. With the scope being under 22 Oz and having a low enough elevation turret to piggy back a red dot without needing a riser it is seeming like a good option so far. The glass is really clear and the extra magnification could come in handy for identification at distances. The eyebox is good at 4.5x and up to 15x magnification. I like the reticle .View attachment 8218084

Nice! How did this ultimately go? I definitely don't need this kind of mag range on a 5.56, but it's light enough that it'd be kind of tempting, sans the price tag.

2.5 -10 NSX piggy RDS is bombproof, yada yada I need FFP. Maybe… only find using top magnification on it anyway pass 300 yards.

If really FFP requires then 4-14 F1 piggy RDS

Vortex if wish only to brag about how great their warranty is.

PLx 1-8 have really busy reticle.

LPVO doesn’t need RDS only if running NV with shitty laser that will fail.

My vote March 1-10 shorty

I can imagine one could get away without having a FFP reticle, but it would be nice to have one anyway if the option is there to lower the workload of knowing exactly what is happening with your kit.

As far as "LPVO doesn't need RDS", what if you want to aim passively? The whole point of NV is to be quiet and remain hidden. Shooting laser beams everywhere probably isn't the best way to do that.

I like the March 1-10, but it's in a completely different price bracket.

Enjoying this thread.
FYI - G3 - SPUR (1.50) - RMR type 2 - TRex Arms offset combo is fits tight and compact together. Everything lines up well. KAC 5.56 upper

This looks like a really nice setup if you don't want passive aiming.

 

[WILLSMITH030382]

Good data point, thanks!


Is the turret really that tall? I was thinking of using an SCRS anyway, so I wonder how much of a difference that would make with the turret height being an issue.

Nice! How did this ultimately go? I definitely don't need this kind of mag range on a 5.56, but it's light enough that it'd be kind of tempting, sans the price tag.

I can imagine one could get away without having a FFP reticle, but it would be nice to have one anyway if the option is there to lower the workload of knowing exactly what is happening with your kit.

As far as "LPVO doesn't need RDS", what if you want to aim passively? The whole point of NV is to be quiet and remain hidden. Shooting laser beams everywhere probably isn't the best way to do that.

I like the March 1-10, but it's in a completely different price bracket.

This looks like a really nice setup if you don't want passive aiming.

So far the lht 4.5-22 has been solid with the 509t on my DD Mk12 . I usually use the lht to around 15-18 magnification and it works well . I make hits at 500 yds with black hills 77grain otm with consistency . Although I dont really need the 22x power its nice to have for PID.

And for me yes the GLX 2.5-10 turret is a little too tall to use with a piggy back. Its a little too hard to get a consistent cheek weld for me to feel comfortable with.

 

[FredHammer]

I got the Credo 2-10 for an SPR build. Had a parallax problem at max magnification. If I focused the ocular for a crisp sight picture at 1000yds the sight picture went to shit at the lower mags. Sent it to Trijicon and they had a new scope for me in stupid fast return time of 4 days. This Credo is perfect parallax setting. I leave it at 6X to see and use the reticle, then mounted a 45 degree RDS for the close target engagement. Of note is the eye relief. It's longer than any other scope I own/owned so a cantilever mount is a must for an AR.

 

[Jazz30-06]

So far the lht 4.5-22 has been solid with the 509t on my DD Mk12 . I usually use the lht to around 15-18 magnification and it works well . I make hits at 500 yds with black hills 77grain otm with consistency . Although I dont really need the 22x power its nice to have for PID.

And for me yes the GLX 2.5-10 turret is a little too tall to use with a piggy back. Its a little too hard to get a consistent cheek weld for me to feel comfortable with.

How is CA between those two scopes? That's one thing with the LHT that seemed to be glaring in C_DOES's video. I would be more willing to accept it on a sub-$1k scope, but at $2k, that gets a lot harder to put up with. He also mentioned and kind of showed that the image became less ideal at higher mag ranges, like you are saying, IIRC.

Regarding the turret height, are you somehow using a cheek weld for the 509T or do you mean chin weld? I'm just curious because my intended use case of NV means that, I think, I will be required to use a chin weld anyway. This would negate the turret height issue if I am understanding you correctly.

I got the Credo 2-10 for an SPR build. Had a parallax problem at max magnification. If I focused the ocular for a crisp sight picture at 1000yds the sight picture went to shit at the lower mags. Sent it to Trijicon and they had a new scope for me in stupid fast return time of 4 days. This Credo is perfect parallax setting. I leave it at 6X to see and use the reticle, then mounted a 45 degree RDS for the close target engagement. Of note is the eye relief. It's longer than any other scope I own/owned so a cantilever mount is a must for an AR.

You don't have any parallax issues at the min and max ranges or at any distance? That's interesting. Noted on the eye relief. After looking at them again, the Credo has the longest and the GLX seems to have the shortest, by a good margin.

 

[steve123]

View attachment 8164032View attachment 8164033

Love it when the lines on the turrets line up well with the line on the housing - unlike yours. Not to be mean but I'd send that back.

Maybe just me but that is tops in being miffed in rifle scope dissatisfaction.

 

[steve123]

As far as magnification goes I like more on the top end if I can get away with it. That means for me I like using my Athlon Helos G2 2-12x42 for distant targets for than my March DFP 1-10 shorty.

This 1-10 is on my short AR in 5.56. Appropriate on this gun but I shoot farther out more than up close. I'll take a few shots from 200Y to 421Y but for the fun of it I'll be shooting it at 1150Y too. That'll happen later today. Would I rather have more than 10x - yes sir ee. 1x is essential "in case" on this carbine so there's that. Also don't see the need for a RD.

12x on the HG2 is much appreciated vs 10x on the March. The HG2 is on a 22" 6mm FatRat and is very capable at 1150Y! This scope is amazing for the price. That's compared to my 6mmBR bolt gun with a Cronus G2 4.5-29x56 on top where hit ratios only sightly favor the 6mmBR.

Of course the March is higher priced by 4-5 times but in reality I like the HG2 just as much. For darn sure easier to afford putting on different guns. I have two and have thought of putting these on some other rifles but I too like trying out different scopes instead. Like for example the Vortex Razor LHT 4.5-22 which I can't help but be disappointed in for the price.

Taking this a step farther I'd like a 2-14x38ish MPVO. I don't use 1x, its there for the .001% I might need it, otherwise 2x is fine for everything else, and 14x is a little more mag for long range without much optical compromise. That's why I didn't buy a March 1.5-15. I've been down that road a couple times and my eyes don't abide short scopes with high mag ratios.

 

[FredHammer]

You don't have any parallax issues at the min and max ranges or at any distance? That's interesting. Noted on the eye relief. After looking at them again, the Credo has the longest and the GLX seems to have the shortest, by a good margin.

No parallax issues on this replacement Credo. Damned fine balance of parallax between the mag ranges. A benchrest shooter might detect some, but shooting IPSC/man size targets to 1000 is ring & ding.

Damn, I just noticed you've been at this since June! I get a scope bug and I get the research dialed in and scope bought within a couple weeks!

 

[Jazz30-06]

As far as magnification goes I like more on the top end if I can get away with it. That means for me I like using my Athlon Helos G2 2-12x42 for distant targets for than my March DFP 1-10 shorty.

This 1-10 is on my short AR in 5.56. Appropriate on this gun but I shoot farther out more than up close. I'll take a few shots from 200Y to 421Y but for the fun of it I'll be shooting it at 1150Y too. That'll happen later today. Would I rather have more than 10x - yes sir ee. 1x is essential "in case" on this carbine so there's that. Also don't see the need for a RD.

12x on the HG2 is much appreciated vs 10x on the March. The HG2 is on a 22" 6mm FatRat and is very capable at 1150Y! This scope is amazing for the price. That's compared to my 6mmBR bolt gun with a Cronus G2 4.5-29x56 on top where hit ratios only sightly favor the 6mmBR.

Of course the March is higher priced by 4-5 times but in reality I like the HG2 just as much. For darn sure easier to afford putting on different guns. I have two and have thought of putting these on some other rifles but I too like trying out different scopes instead. Like for example the Vortex Razor LHT 4.5-22 which I can't help but be disappointed in for the price.

Taking this a step farther I'd like a 2-14x38ish MPVO. I don't use 1x, its there for the .001% I might need it, otherwise 2x is fine for everything else, and 14x is a little more mag for long range without much optical compromise. That's why I didn't buy a March 1.5-15. I've been down that road a couple times and my eyes don't abide short scopes with high mag ratios.

I would love to see an MPVO like that be produced, but I (with a pretty limited knowledge base) can't think of any scopes with a 7x multiplier for some reason. A 2-16 would be another great option since it seems like they have generally figured out how to make 8x without too many compromises.

No parallax issues on this replacement Credo. Damned fine balance of parallax between the mag ranges. A benchrest shooter might detect some, but shooting IPSC/man size targets to 1000 is ring & ding.

Damn, I just noticed you've been at this since June! I get a scope bug and I get the research dialed in and scope bought within a couple weeks!

Good to hear!

Yeah, I've had a lot of stuff happening in my life since I started this search that has dried up funding, unfortunately. So, I'm just trying to keep this thread going to learn as much as I can and hopefully help someone else out in the process.

 

[FredHammer]

I would love to see an MPVO like that be produced, but I (with a pretty limited knowledge base) can't think of any scopes with a 7x multiplier for some reason. A 2-16 would be another great option since it seems like they have generally figured out how to make 8x without too many compromises.

Good to hear!

Yeah, I've had a lot of stuff happening in my life since I started this search that has dried up funding, unfortunately. So, I'm just trying to keep this thread going to learn as much as I can and hopefully help someone else out in the process.

That Athlon Helos BTR 2-12x42 reviewed by C_does might not be tank durable as a Credo, but it’s a solid feature rich option for the price bracket you initially stated. I think C_does listed it as his 2023 year favorite. IIRC

 

[Fret]

The 2-12x Helos sure has a huge center dot though at .3 mils. I guess it makes it easy to see.