• The Shot You’ll Never Forget Giveaway - Enter To Win A Barrel From Rifle Barrel Blanks!

    Tell us about the best or most memorable shot you’ve ever taken. Contest ends June 13th and remember: subscribe for a better chance of winning!

    Join contest Subscribe

Rifle Scopes Scope Design, and Weight Trade-offs

Lexington

Just Some Guy
Full Member
Minuteman
Nov 15, 2005
195
10
Spotsylvania, Virginia
What are the biggest drivers of weight in a tactical rifle scope? All things considered, what are the heaviest components?

In particular, I am wondering what is in the Vortex Razor Gen 2 that makes it significantly heavier than the average scope in its class. It weighs 48 ounces and the average in its class is around 33 ounces (my estimate).
 
pretty sure vortex said most the weight comes from the turret internals being all tool steel or something like that...they addressed this way been when the scope was being released...too long ago for me to rememeber exactly
 
The optical elements. The heavier the scope, the more lenses as a general rule. There are obviously other factors as well to a degree.

So, there is a weight penalty to pay for the 6x magnification? If the optical elements are mostly to blame, I can see why the 4x AMG and 4x Kahles 624i are lighter.

Magnification factors seem to be more about specmanship than anything else. 4x gets you from 6-24x, and 6x widens that slightly to 4.5-27x. The FOV differences at both the low and high ends seem practically inconsequential, but the increase in weight is quite a hit.
 
The scopes similar are in the 38-40 ounce range and not 33 ounces so there is a 8-10 ounce diffeeence. It is what it is if you want to run a Razor II and get the same quality for a good savings in price. Having gone from multiple S&B 5-25s to the Razor II 4.5-27s and 3-18, I felt no difference in the rifle feel once swapped. The small difference isn't noticeable.
 
Perhaps 33 ounces is a wrong number from bad memory and casual research. I don't recall the chart I was looking at which generated this discussion. My interest is more in the design trade-offs and the relationship to weight. The Razor Gen 2 provides a convenient case in point.

An 8-10 ounce difference is still huge. That's a lot of metal, ball bearings, and optical elements that need to be accounted for. So, where is the weight?

Is it a function of the abrupt change from the main tube to the objective housing, and the physics needed to accomplish that, yet keep the scope just over 14 inches? The other two scopes I used for comparison are between 15" and 16".
 
Look at the Athlon Cronus, essentially the same scope with standard turrets. How much does it weigh? 36oz.

This is also what I was thinking, the Razor Gen II 4.5-27 seems to come off the same line as the Athlon Cronus 4.5-29 and the Cronus weighs just under 36oz, more than 12oz lighter. March has an 8x scope (5-40x56) that weighs just over 31oz. Morgan is correct, Vortex did address this when the scopes came out because many were upset with how heavy they are. As competition scopes it may not be that big of a deal, but if you plan to carry the rifle for hours it might make a difference for some. To the OP's original question, what makes a scope heavier than another, it is a combination of things, how much glass, type of turrets, material, how thick the material is and so forth... the manufacturer has control over these variables when they design a scope, they typically design to meet what they think is a market need. Obviously, the Razor Gen II's are extremely popular, are they for everyone, clearly not, but they appear to be one of the best scopes for PRS right now.
 
Agreed and Vortex listened to people wanting a lighter scope and came out with the AMG. Smaller tube and knobs but most all the features and a good mag range at 28.5 ounces. An option for people wanting lighter for a hunting/match rifle combo.