Rifle Scopes Tangent, Minox, or Vortex
- Thread starter Anthony-ss
- Start date
Better? Reticles are a personal preference. I really like the gen3xr. Have you actually looked through the scope with it? The center dot everyone complains about really is not that big at all. If anything I’d say my skmr3 center dot is too small... again personal preference.
I caution folks to make judgements about reticles on paper. Often times through the scope and on a steel range they come into their own. Case and point I thought the h2cmr was shit on paper and it’s quickly become one of my favorite clean reticles.
I kind of agree. Dot on my Stryker is .045 - that's really the minimum I'd consider with a 25x scope. I think the .03 dots are too small and anything from .045 to .06 is perfect. .07 might be a tad heavy, but I can't imagine it would be an actual problem.
Cracks me up on this forum sometimes, everyone demands .2 mil wind holds then bitches about the center dot. If you’d go to shoot rather than read on the Internet you’d realize that wind holds are almost always needed and you’ll rarely spend time on that center dot!
This especially holds true as you shoot to distance, wind is always a variable. Use the .2 mil wind holds you say you needed and stay off the center dot, you may start hitting the target!
This especially holds true as you shoot to distance, wind is always a variable. Use the .2 mil wind holds you say you needed and stay off the center dot, you may start hitting the target!
Just depends on shooting style.
When there is a single target engagement, many people dial wind. Or at least dial wind until the width of the target is left.
On kyl targets many people dial so they can use the small center dot for more precise aiming on the smaller targets.
Also, the dots on the full mil are even larger than the center dot. So what’s your reasoning if people are holding wind and it falls on the whole mil, some may not like that.
Frank has a video on how many people set up their NPA to the center as a habit. So dialing is an easy way to not muscle your rifle over.
And in general some people’s eyes just don’t like the large center dot as we gravitate towards it.
The gen3xr is great for some people, but not others.
You’ve made the mistake of thinking your way is the only/right way.
Last edited:
The center dot is 1.2” and the whole mil dots are 1.6” at 450 yds.
How do you feel about that when you’re shooting at a 2” or 2.5” piece of steel?
Completely fine because my dot is only 36% the size of a 2” target at 450 yards which is probably the smallest or smaller than any Kyl rack I’ve seen.
Talking about gen3xr.
Yes correct. You say it’s 1.2” at 450. That’s 1.13 in^2. A 2” and 2.5” plate is 3.14 or 4.9 in^2 respectively.
The 2” plate is 2.8X larger than the dot and the 2.5” plate is 4.33x larger than the center dot on the gen 3 xr.
That’s more than enough to see both my dot and plenty of the target to make the shot precisely.
The plate is 2” wide and 2” tall (or 2.5).
The dot is a .075mil circle or cone. That is 1.2” in diameter at 450 yds.
If you put the center of the .075 dot on the center of the 2x2” plate, it’s not 2.8x bigger. The dot will obstruct over half the target.
Let’s put this in angular measurements.
.075 mil = .25 moa
So if a target is a .5moa, the center dot covers half.
.075 mil = .25 moa
So if a target is a .5moa, the center dot covers half.
Let me clarify. I’m speaking on how many will perceive this when looking through an optic.
While the area of a 2” square is greater than the area of a 2” circle, most people are not going to perceive it this way when seeing a .075 dot on a .5moa target.
On paper, yes, but as you said in another thread, it’s how you see perceive it in real life that matters.
While the area of a 2” square is greater than the area of a 2” circle, most people are not going to perceive it this way when seeing a .075 dot on a .5moa target.
On paper, yes, but as you said in another thread, it’s how you see perceive it in real life that matters.
The Gen2XR is more than usable. It takes some getting used to. I do not like the Gen3XR, wish they had something along the lines of a MPCT1.
I would not pay $4,700 for a TT. The shot show pricing of $4,000 is a good buy in my opinion, but it becomes harder with the ZCO527
We’re talking about MR4, Gen 3 XR, and EBR 7. Who’s buying these and not holding for most corrections!? You bring up Single target engagement again not the intended usuage of the aforementioned reticles.
I think your response is well thought out, I just disagree with most of it when we’re talking about reticles designed for correction being made utilizing the reticle.
Edit: “just depends on shooting style” is the key phrase and I completely agree. My OP was intended for those who understand the reason for purchasing this type of reticle.
I hope those considering these types of reticles would reconsider if they intend on dialing most corrections.
I’m very confused? I’m not talking squares and circles. I was giving you numbers for circles which are even smaller than squares with the same dimensions. I gave you actual mathematical numbers of area. Which is 2D. Our eyes see in 3D. The numbers you gave are 1D. If anything the numbers I gave are a closer representation to what the eyes “perceives”. As long as your dot doesn’t completely cover the target you should have no issue centering it up. There’s no target you should miss because of the dot size. If you missed it’s likely your wind call or a bad shot. Or you’re trying to shoot golf balls at 500 yards. In which case good luck regardless of your reticle lol.
This is all personal preference, my only real point was that people should look through and shoot the scope before casting judgement on any reticle not just the gen3xr because often in practice they may be much different than what you thought in your head just seeing it on paper
Dtom your KYL concern is valid I personally won’t have any issues on the rack as I’ll be utelizing my American Rifle Series training on the rack “cover plate and shoot” especially when it’s at 450!
I’m not sure why this reticle discussion hasn’t discussed where the Gen 3 XR really shines, when not at 25X. What’s your opinion on the larger dots when shooting at 12X, 15X and 20X? Because I have a hell of a time with the dots on other reticles when not at max magnification.
I’m not sure why this reticle discussion hasn’t discussed where the Gen 3 XR really shines, when not at 25X. What’s your opinion on the larger dots when shooting at 12X, 15X and 20X? Because I have a hell of a time with the dots on other reticles when not at max magnification.
I agree it would be interesting to see the reticle against a distant target with different zoom.
I wasn’t super thrilled about the gen3xr until I used it in a match. I liked it enough to buy it but wasn’t sure how I would like it compared to my MR4. I loved the reticle during the match. The larger center dot got me on target very fast. The .2 hashes being different sizes made it faster to hold wind or elevation. Overall I was very pleased with the scope. The turrets are as good or better as everyone says. Almost worth the price point alone. I was able to dial very fast and be confident I was where I wanted to be. If you can afford the price I say get the TT. If you would be pushing to hard to get it I’d have no problem recommending a minox. My buddy and I both got ours from cstactical and my buddy had an issue and sent his back to them. He had a new one in his hand within a week. I will agree that minox may need to tighten up their qc but if you buy one from a reputable dealer like cstactical then I would be confident that I’d you got a lemon they would replace it with one you were happy with.
ETA
During the tyl rack at Altus (core) this past weekend I had a .2 left wind hold so I used the first hash of the reticle and it worked very well. I went 9 for 10 on that stage which had you move to a different barricade after a miss. I hit both the small squares. On the train up day Friday I had no problem seeing or hitting the smallest square with the reticle with very little wind. The dot was held at the edge of the target but not off. The larger dot makes it very usable at 10 power. Possibley even lower but I didn’t really check.
ETA
During the tyl rack at Altus (core) this past weekend I had a .2 left wind hold so I used the first hash of the reticle and it worked very well. I went 9 for 10 on that stage which had you move to a different barricade after a miss. I hit both the small squares. On the train up day Friday I had no problem seeing or hitting the smallest square with the reticle with very little wind. The dot was held at the edge of the target but not off. The larger dot makes it very usable at 10 power. Possibley even lower but I didn’t really check.
Don't overlook the Nightforce 7-35 mil-XT
Have you not seen the GEN3XR? It's between that and the mil-XT for best reticle imo.
Is this the same as asking if a Porsche 918 would be the same as a Bentley Continental GT? (That's a weight joke for the Gen2 btw) Both haul ass but one is on a different level than anything else?
For sure if you're buying new look at what guys have sold the used ones for because depreciation is huge on some of these high end scopes.
Btw why not a Vortex AMG?
For sure if you're buying new look at what guys have sold the used ones for because depreciation is huge on some of these high end scopes.
Btw why not a Vortex AMG?
For me, with not so great eyes anymore, I prefer a .05 mil center dot over all the others I've seen so far. .03 is getting too hard to see at 12-15x in my Midas TAC - sometimes I dial wind and sometimes there's none or just a little wind.
I'd rather have that .075 dot than a .03 center dot.
That H59 in S&B 5-25's sure was a good purchase decision all those years ago!
I'd rather have that .075 dot than a .03 center dot.
That H59 in S&B 5-25's sure was a good purchase decision all those years ago!
I like the sb 5-25. I feel some of the other manufacturers are making a better product today. The reticle that really interest me are the msr2 and tremor 3.
They've been very good scopes for "me" because I use the 10M focus and haven't needed to send one back yet. The TT has some appeal now because of the G3XR for me. Maybe after my next inheritance, lol.
Diminishing returns - $$$$. Fine if you have the money, not so much if....
A friend has a new ZCO, he's not impressed.
I don't have the patience to be sending expensive scopes back.
Basically I can point out things I dislike about any scope, none perfect. I've narrowed down the features I prefer and at this point I'm sticking with what I have!!!
this is where im at...ive owned/played with mostly everything out there and as a whole package i like the gen 2 razors better than everything
I think some of these people dislike and talk shit about GEN3XR reticle but they did not even look at one in person.
I agree with you about mil-XT but i like GEN3XR more than mil-XT just my opinion.
For what reasons and what trade offs do you think you may of given up. The one thing I love with them is the 10 mil per rev
I switched mostly all my scopes to CENTER DOT type reticles.from .02 (LRR) m4a kahles zcomp all at .03 couple h59 (.05)
I had ior .08 so my eyes already knows the diff..and if the gen3xr is true .07? Its not my PREFERENCE..i dont wear reading glasses eyes still good (thank god) and im ok with .02 maybe horus h59 and t3 (.05) is the biggest i pick..i know theta just came out with h59..but its another 500.00 extra..4500.00 for a scope??? Hmmm
I had ior .08 so my eyes already knows the diff..and if the gen3xr is true .07? Its not my PREFERENCE..i dont wear reading glasses eyes still good (thank god) and im ok with .02 maybe horus h59 and t3 (.05) is the biggest i pick..i know theta just came out with h59..but its another 500.00 extra..4500.00 for a scope??? Hmmm
personal preference things
i like the turret system of the gen 2 better than anything...i have multiple barrels for my rifles and swap them pretty often...its the easiest to track and adjust and not get lost with
i like center dots, but they arent much use to me...i usually zero on 1/4" dots and the ebr2c gap is perfect for centering up on the dot, then i hold for 99% of everything else
vs the 525i - eye box is better, eye relief on the 525i is almost too short to mount on any of my rifles because my LOP is pretty long...cant move it back far enough because of the turret housing
vs minox - like the turret feel/system better
the main thing i always notice...i dont know if its called anything, but its the sight presentation i guess? when i look thru the gen 2s i cant hardly see much of the outter tube or any ring around the sight picture...the tube sort of goes away...with every other scope it feels more like im looking thru a tube...the 525i is the worst, the minox is better but i still notice it...more annoying to me than negatively affecting anything...but if im paying $3k+ for scopes i need to like them more than what i can get for sub $2k
the zco is nice, but im not super hot on a new optic co...needs to prove itself
dont like the TT reticles...i like lines a certain way for multiple targets and combo movers...same with schmidts
im splitting hairs based on years of experience what i prefer looking at...anyt of them are more than capable....if i liked something better, id buy it...and ive bought a lot lol but i keep comin back to the gen 2...just bought another one this morning lol
BJay you pay for QC and for everything being perfect on that scope ( Reticle is personal opinion and it's subjective) . TT is more $$$ than some others optics but i think you pay that extra for everything to be perfect on that optics. Just my opinion not trying to start argument.
The turrets are the main reason I sold my AMG. I absolutely HATE the dial nonsense. On top of that, they still can't get with the times and give me .2 elevation holdovers. I bent the hell out of a Vortex rep's ear about this bullshit at SHOT show.
How in the fuck are you going to come out with a new reticle and only add a dot? GTFO
The only flaw on the Minox MR4 is that the holdovers are not quickly distinguishable because they are all the same size.
No matter for me. In the end I'll stick to NF and TT since their new reticles finally give me everything I want.
Last edited:
I sold 2 theta to gungasm here..one was 3-15 and 5-25 both tactical model..gen2xr love those scopes...again reticle is preference and the g2xr only offers .5 mil hash lines..i wish they had some part of that ret in .2 but it was good enough..the g2xr has .025 lines then g3xr .07 pretty big jump
Theta is overall the best built scopes i ever had..ill buy them again for sure..
run 5-6 barrels on one rifle and dont waste trips to the range to confirm zero's and thats where the turret system comes in handy...never have to worry if you got off or count clicks because theres a center reference dial...if you arent doin that, it dont matter much either way
like i said, personal preferences...NF and TT dont interest me at all
You must need a forklift for your range bag.. with all those barrels and Razor Gen 2's
Btw Have you tried the AMG? If so what was your opinion ?
i had one for a while...i like the amg if weight is a real concern...otherwise i prefer the gen 2 over it for the bigger/more forgiving eye box
ive also noticed my eye doesnt really like reticle hashes that arent centered on the horizontal...if lines only go up or down from center (like the ebr7, scr, skmr, mil c), my eye automatically wants to center the hash on the target instead of the hash/horizontal intersection...i have to consciously correct it a lot of the time, and i dont like having to do things consciously on the clock...its much more natural with reticles like the ebr 2c and mr4 for me...if i only used 1 reticle for a while my brain might unlearn that, but not something i care to "retrain"
ive also noticed my eye doesnt really like reticle hashes that arent centered on the horizontal...if lines only go up or down from center (like the ebr7, scr, skmr, mil c), my eye automatically wants to center the hash on the target instead of the hash/horizontal intersection...i have to consciously correct it a lot of the time, and i dont like having to do things consciously on the clock...its much more natural with reticles like the ebr 2c and mr4 for me...if i only used 1 reticle for a while my brain might unlearn that, but not something i care to "retrain"
From an optical stand point at what point do you feel it is just a diminishing return for the price paid.
the higher end scopes are definitely better optically
how much it matters is hard to say cause everyone sees differently
im left eye dominant, shoot right handed...my right eye is weaker than my left even after lasik...its hard for me to tell much difference between a gen 2/kahles/schmidt/TT/minox etc with my right eye because my eye is the limiting factor...its mainly just small tone/color variance...left eye i can tell the differences better, but i dont use my left near as much
so for me...having the weaker right eye, it doesnt get much better past the 2k-ish mark
how much it matters is hard to say cause everyone sees differently
im left eye dominant, shoot right handed...my right eye is weaker than my left even after lasik...its hard for me to tell much difference between a gen 2/kahles/schmidt/TT/minox etc with my right eye because my eye is the limiting factor...its mainly just small tone/color variance...left eye i can tell the differences better, but i dont use my left near as much
so for me...having the weaker right eye, it doesnt get much better past the 2k-ish mark
While everyone's eyes are quite obviously different, i can definitely see the superiority in Minox, NF, Tangent vs Burris, Kahles, etc.
I think the vortex glass is great while Kahles left me very disappointed in terms of CA and glass in general. Many people call me crazy. But at some point it comes down to features and reliability. I trust NF and TT the most without a doubt in my mind that they will track and work as intended. A great warranty is great, but I'd rather not need it.
Last edited:
AT $1850 the Razor is by far the best bang for your buck! I've been using one for 2 years and I currently have the optics bug to upgrade. However, I shoot with several guys that run the TT, Kahles and NightForce and every time I do side by sides with those scopes I struggle to understand what I would be upgrading to for the huge difference in cost. That being said, I still have the bug
I have always tried to draw parallels b/w the car and gun world - they don't work.
Toyota: Reliable, dependable, starts every time (you should see some of the the beaters they have in Africa - that is how toyota should make commercials)
Ferrari: Expensive, lights on fire, insane maintenance
Then again, saying something is the Corolla of the gun world is not very impressive sounding...
So whats your take k5-25 vs razor gen2 ..which would you rather keep i know one is bit more pricey
I haven't looked through the new Kahles yet. I have a buddy with a k5-25, but I have yet to shoot with him this year as he has been busy. Most of my shooting buddies bought Tangent Thetas
Last edited:
What do you mean by better internals and fit and finish? The Minox fit and finish is as good as it gets and the internals you know nothing about. You don’t know what either scope is made of on the inside.
You clearly haven’t owned a TT then. The fit and finish is impeccable. The white marks on the Minox look like a 6 year old drew on with crayon in comparison. It’s the little things. Not saying the Minox is awful. It’s not. But it’s not a TT optically or from a fit and finish standpoint.
These three scope are in different price ranges, and all three are good scopes. I think this is a matter of how much money you are willing to spend.
The waters are muddied a bit by the fact that there are new contenders: ZCO and Steiner M7Xi. Then, there is always the S&B 5-25x56, which is still a very nice scope with GR2ID looking promising.
I have not yet tested the ZCO and M7Xi and have only see GR2ID reticle at SHOT. I plan to compare all of these this year, but until then my recommendation have not changed.
If you can afford a Tangent Theta, get a Tangent Theta.
My high end riflescope recommendations, for the most part, devolved to
-TT525P if you want the best precision scope
-TT315M if you want a lighter general purpose bolt gun scope
-Vortex AMG 6-24x50 if you are looking for a high magnification and reasonable weight crossover scope
This does not mean other scopes aren't good and depending on your budget and application, they might be a better fit. If someone comes to me and says he wants the best, these are the recommendations I give him and I have yet to have anyone complain that I steered them wrong.
Once I complete my tests this year, the recommendations may change. For now, they stand.
ILya
The waters are muddied a bit by the fact that there are new contenders: ZCO and Steiner M7Xi. Then, there is always the S&B 5-25x56, which is still a very nice scope with GR2ID looking promising.
I have not yet tested the ZCO and M7Xi and have only see GR2ID reticle at SHOT. I plan to compare all of these this year, but until then my recommendation have not changed.
If you can afford a Tangent Theta, get a Tangent Theta.
My high end riflescope recommendations, for the most part, devolved to
-TT525P if you want the best precision scope
-TT315M if you want a lighter general purpose bolt gun scope
-Vortex AMG 6-24x50 if you are looking for a high magnification and reasonable weight crossover scope
This does not mean other scopes aren't good and depending on your budget and application, they might be a better fit. If someone comes to me and says he wants the best, these are the recommendations I give him and I have yet to have anyone complain that I steered them wrong.
Once I complete my tests this year, the recommendations may change. For now, they stand.
ILya
I have Schmidts, Hensoldts, Zeiss, Nikons, Redfields, Leupolds, Kahles, Russian Military Scopes, and the Vortex hangs right in there with them. I just purchased a Vortex Razor Gen II from Europtics. For what I do it will do just fine. My only negative on it is the weight. You can get lighter scopes but you will pay more. I am not sure if the Vortex weight is by design or because they are using less expensive materials or both. I have an equivalent Schmidt PMII that is 10 oz lighter but I paid a lot more money for it. You do get a lot of scope for the money.AT $1850 the Razor is by far the best bang for your buck! I've been using one for 2 years and I currently have the optics bug to upgrade. However, I shoot with several guys that run the TT, Kahles and NightForce and every time I do side by sides with those scopes I struggle to understand what I would be upgrading to for the huge difference in cost. That being said, I still have the bug
Last edited:
Especially the ones that click in between hash marks and/or the ones with off center reticles.
I owned two Minox described exactly as you have.
Once you get beyond the price of the Gen 2 Razor, you run in to diminishing returns. If a TT is 10/10 optically, the Razor is a 7-8/10 and nearly 1/3 the cost. Value wise, it is the current King.
