Rifle Scopes PST gen2 vs DMR IIi vs ?

[tehweej]

So I just ordered a savage stealth 6.5 Creedmoor (in all its left-handed glory!) and need a scope to top it. I have about $2k left in my build budget, and still need a bipod, scope mount, and ammo. And more mags. Probably.

I can get a pro deal on the vortex and maybe to the bushnell, so I am planning on spending 1k for the scope. Which one would serve my (1000 yds most likely max distance, sometimes, maybe) needs best for my budget? Is there another scope anyone would recommend over these two? Spend a bit more and get a gen 1 razor? Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[fdkay]

I just recently compared a PST II to a LRTSi.
The PST had excellent feedback on the adjustments, better than the LRTSi, but very close.
The glass on the PST was good, but the Bushnell was noticeably better, and this is comparing a 44mm objective to a 50, so in theory, the PST was allowing more light to enter.
The PST II is one heck of a package and a serious upgrade from the original.
Both have a reputation for tracking. The Bushnell has a rep for being nearly bomb proof.
If the PST is significantly cheaper, then I would probably look there, if they are within a couple hundred dollars, I think I would lean to the Bushnell.
My next scope is likely the SIghtron 4.5-24 coming out this summer.

 

[BoilerUP]

I just recently compared a PST II to a LRTSi.
The PST had excellent feedback on the adjustments, better than the LRTSi, but very close.
The glass on the PST was good, but the Bushnell was noticeably better, and this is comparing a 44mm objective to a 50, so in theory, the PST was allowing more light to enter.
The PST II is one heck of a package and a serious upgrade from the original.
Both have a reputation for tracking. The Bushnell has a rep for being nearly bomb proof.
If the PST is significantly cheaper, then I would probably look there, if they are within a couple hundred dollars, I think I would lean to the Bushnell.
My next scope is likely the SIghtron 4.5-24 coming out this summer.

Owning both the LRTSi 4.5-18x and PST II 5-25x, this largely mirrors my own observations.

My only knock on the LRTSi is the thickness of the G3i reticle compared to the EBR-2C.

 

[patriot07]

EBR-2C reticle is fantastic. Illumination is really well-done on the PST2, and glass quality is quite good. However, build quality is still the most questionable part of the PST2 line. I bought one and returned it due to a partially stiff elevation turret and being unable to get the reticle clear to my eyes against darker backgrounds. I have not looked through that specific Bushnell to be able to compare it.

I bought an SWFA 5-20 HD after I returned the PST2 5-25. For $1300 new and around $900-$1000 used, I don't think there is a better value out there than the SWFA HD. It doesn't have zero stop or illumination are the only knocks against it (even though you can pay $200 more to get illumination, it's really not done well enough to be worth the money if you read most reviews). However, the build quality, glass quality, eyebox, eye relief, depth of field, and overall ease of use is second to none in the price range. It's a big step up from the PST2, and I really think anything you want to upgrade from that point is just a 'want', not a need. However, I do like the mil quad reticle. It's simple but effective. If you don't like the reticle, you should pick something else.

One other thing - the Bushnell tops out at 18x, which isn't bad. But purely comparing it against the PST2, having the extra mag up to 25x will be a little helpful at the long end of your range. You can certainly shoot 1,000 yards at 18x, but it would be a little easier at 25x. And the PST2 glass is clear all the way up to 25x.

 

[fdkay]

I too, had difficulty getting the PST II to focus for my eyes, I had a friend help me with evaluating the scopes and he did not have the same issue. I figure it was just incompatibility with my older eyes. I also found the ocular focus and the illumination knobs to be very difficult to turn, but this was an early production demo model that had been all over the place with folks cranking on the adjustments so I did not hold that it against it.

 

[gr8fuldoug]

FWIW, we have been selling many guys Athlon Ares BTR's that were looking at PST's and they are pleased with the scope quality and of course at the more than 25% lower cost

Thank you for your continued support.
If there is anything else we can assist you with please let me know.
Doug
Camera Land
720 Old Bethpage Rd
Old Bethpage NY 11804
516-217-1000
Please visit our website @ www.cameralandny.com

 

[Glassaholic]

OP, I've had both scopes - the PST II 5-25x50 and the DMR IIi 3.5-21x50. The PST II is an impressive improvement over the original PST in just about every way, glass, turrets, illumination. The DMR II is also an impressive improvement over the original DMR, the glass (or rather the coatings) are better, the turrets are a bit nicer and the illumination is the best daylight illumination I've seen in a high magnification scope. Initially I thought the DMR IIi was better in resolution vs. the PST II, but after I played more with the diopter with the PST II I feel I dialed it in nicely and the resolution of the PST II ended up edging out the DMR IIi slightly. The DMR IIi is shorter and built like a tank, but at a cost of over 35oz in weight while the PST II is longer but lighter at just over 31oz, both performed about as well in low light which was really good. If you were putting the DMR IIi on a large frame AR or covert style rifle I would not hesitate to recommend it, but honestly for your application I would probably recommend the PST II 5-25x50 for your Stealth because you get 25x at the top end and it is less expensive. The one thing I would say is that I found the PST II diopter adjustment to be a bit more finicky than others so you'll want to play around with it a bit more to get it dialed in just right. Finally, if you have any plans to shoot at shorter range the DMR II parallax bottoms out at 75 yards while the PST II goes all the way to 25 yards, so that is another potential advantage for the PST II. Also, some other posters here have mentioned the LRHS/LRTS scopes by Bushnell and I will say that I had the LRTS 4.5-18x44 that I thought was extremely impressive in regard to glass quality and edged out the PST II in overall IQ, in fact, I'd say in order to get better glass than what I found with the LRTS you'll have to look at scopes in the >= $2000 range.

 

[tehweej]

Awesome info! Thanks guys. I hadn’t even looked at the LRTS. I have to check the pricing on those and see how it compares to the vortex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tehweej]

Awesome info! Thanks guys. I hadn’t even looked at the LRTS. I have to check the pricing on those and see how it compares to the vortex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[IanHusaberg]

I have a Gen 2 PST(Great value$) On my Tikka T3x and I'm going to say it's going to be the new Athlon ARES 4.5-30x56 with the 34MM tube could be the new value KING?

I also have the Athlon Ares 2.5-15x50(sako quad) and Ares 4.5-27x50(Bergara BMP?) They aren't as good as the PST2. When you look in the diaopter it obvious which one is superior. The glass is edge to edge on the PST. A little bit of a tunnel effect on the Athlon(not ETE). New ARES could be a PST killer?????.......

 

[lte82]

Dmr2 > Xtr2 > Pst2

 

[tehweej]

Dmr2 > Xtr2 > Pst2

Would you put the the LRTSi with the dmr? I am assuming it is similar glass, just a different feature package. I really like the the features and looks of the LRTSi. I think it will look slick on the stealth.

The prices between the pst and LRTSi are about $100 different, so I am leaning heavily toward the bushnell.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[supercorndogs]

Would you put the the LRTSi with the dmr? I am assuming it is similar glass, just a different feature package. I really like the the features and looks of the LRTSi. I think it will look slick on the stealth.

The prices between the pst and LRTSi are about $100 different, so I am leaning heavily toward the bushnell.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would call them almost the same scope. The big difference being the DMRII has more internal adjustment with its 34mm tube, but the LRTS/LRHS has a much better field of view.

 

[alaskalanche]

I would call them almost the same scope. The big difference being the DMRII has more internal adjustment with its 34mm tube, but the LRTS/LRHS has a much better field of view.

I have the LRHS 3-12x44 and 4.5-18x44 and DMR ii. I can certainly see the FOV on the 3-12 being more but the 4.5-18 is listed at 23.5 and the DMR is 25.3....not a huge difference in specs just surprised that the LRHS appear to have a much better FOV.

 

[supercorndogs]

I have the LRHS 3-12x44 and 4.5-18x44 and DMR ii. I can certainly see the FOV on the 3-12 being more but the 4.5-18 is listed at 23.5 and the DMR is 25.3....not a huge difference in specs just surprised that the LRHS appear to have a much better FOV.

Thats in a 3.5 vs 4.5 power optic, vs 35ft at 3 power on the 3-12.

 

[tehweej]

Did some load work up with an exceptional scope (1-4x20 Leupold, hey, it’s what I had) and it’s not too bad. 100yds.

Pretty sure the left/right was me. Had another group that was similar, but not quite as good (different bullet jump tho) without the horizontal dispersion.

Pretty well set on the LRTSi.

Hopefully with a better scope and more time to shoot groups (less rushing), I can tighten it up.