Opinions on Riton X7 Conquer 4-32x56 FFP

sasquatch98226

Private
Full Member
Minuteman
Supporter
Dec 6, 2007
339
49
So I am looking at this scope, and am not finding much info out there. I have had the Nikon FX1000, the Sig Tango 4, and currently have a Burris XTRIII sitting on the .22. I'm thinking of moving the Burris to the .223 Trainer, and getting the Riton for the .22. I know with certificates from Burris you can get XTRIII's for about $1100, a buddy can get me dealer cost on the Riton for about $950, and used PSTII's pop up for about that cost as well.

Anyone have one that has compared it to the The scopes listed above?

Thanks.
 
Raising the dead here. Anyone have experience with this scope, or Riton in general? I bought a Riton the other day to go on my 17HMR.

Watched Lowlights video and got a base understanding.
 
Last edited:
Based off of my limited experience - run and keep on running, don't look back. I bought the x7 Conquer 3-18x50 brand new from sport optics. Brand new out of the box it had the WORST mag ring and parallax tension I have ever felt on any scope by large margin. I worked them back and forth a bunch but my hands were hurting with not sign of useful break in. To top it off, the elevation turret decided to quit tracking. It worked at first, and then the "clicks" disappeared and the turret would just spin smoothly. The reticle didn't move either. With all of these terrible signs on a brand new optic I decided to return it and try out an Athlon instead.
 
I bought the Riton 1-8x28 FFP x7tactix for $399 on ebay new. The weight was chunky, the glass was good, the illumination was aweful, I did like the look of reticle but just couldn't see it we'll on 1x. It was a 1,299 MSRP scope that sells for $899 and I sent it back after buying it for $399 if that tells you anything. Again, glass was good, but the illumination was carried out horribly, and not only that but it bled all over the inside of the scope even though it was weak. I think they have some growing still to do as a company personally.