Rifle Scopes Vortex AMG 1-10 LPVO

[Secant]

Just saw this on SSD. Not a lot of info, but is said to be 8.5" in length and about 18 oz.

Mystery Vortex Optics 1-10x LVPO Revealed - Soldier Systems Daily

This is a close hold LVPO from Vortex Optics. Although it has been in existence for quite awhile it was first publicly seen in leaked images of the Glock carbine in late September. This AMG model (American made) is a 1-10x and is shorter than their Razor model. No details have been released by the

soldiersystems.net

 

[BurtG]

Wow !

Wonder how everything compares to
Their normal 1-10

 

[dms416]

Wow !

Wonder how everything compares to
Their normal 1-10

No doubt there will be some compromises. Given how expensive the first AMG was, can't wait to see what this'll be.

Hopefully this serves as a cue to other mfgs to maybe consider reducing size/weight/profile of existing optic tech rather than pushing stupid BS top ends.

 

[koshkin]

It is a really excellent scope, but it is not currently available to civilians and Vortex has not released any public information on it.

ILya

 

[rlsmith1]

If it's been out for over a year in the military market, I'm curious what differs from their Razor? It seems like 10x erectors require a fair amount more compromises than an 8x. A well executed 1-8 or 2-16 would check a lot of boxes...

 

[FuhQ]

This would be awesome on my .300 BLK guns, but being an AMG, it’s probably ridiculously expensive.

 

[TheOE800]

A Schmidt Dual CC is over $5K new now. I’m confident Vortex can’t be that proud.

 

[Docsherm]

Well shit. Looks like I have to buy another optic.......

 

[Hoody2shoes]

I think the project ended up getting scrapped with the development of the 1-8 for the next gen gear. I think vortex would end up releasing the compact 1-8 without the advanced fire control system before they explored a compact 1-10

 

[AznTactical]

I would be very surprised if this hits the civilian market. I could see it clashing with the current G3 1-10 depending on price point which is unknown.

 

[Glassaholic]

How come Vortex can provide real FDE to .mil, but to civvy's they provide color???

Not sure why all the comments about AMG being so expensive, I always thought the AMG (6-24) was actually a bargain compared to other scopes with similar quality. It was cheaper than the Kahles K624i it replaced when I bought mine

 

[TheOE800]

How come Vortex can provide real FDE to .mil, but to civvy's they provide color???

Not sure why all the comments about AMG being so expensive, I always thought the AMG (6-24) was actually a bargain compared to other scopes with similar quality. It was cheaper than the Kahles K624i it replaced when I bought mine

It cost less than a Schmidt at the time, it was a bargain. That whole gun looks a little spray-coated though, Bill.

 

[koshkin]

I think the project ended up getting scrapped with the development of the 1-8 for the next gen gear. I think vortex would end up releasing the compact 1-8 without the advanced fire control system before they explored a compact 1-10

Which project ended up getting scrapped? The 1-8x was designed well before the compact 1-10x and the 1-8x is significantly bigger.

ILya

 

[Glassaholic]

It cost less than a Schmidt at the time, it was a bargain. That whole gun looks a little spray-coated though, Bill.

Everything costs less than a Schmidt these days Yes, it does look like a spray job, but my point still stands on why Vortex can't just offer a standard color

 

[BurtG]

Everything costs less than a Schmidt these days Yes, it does look like a spray job, but my point still stands on why Vortex can't just offer a standard color

It’s pretty much their trademark at this point

 

[TheOE800]

It’s pretty much their trademark at this point

It’s an interesting choice on their part.

 

[Secant]

Wait, are we talking about Vortex scope colors or S&B price hikes?

 

[TheOE800]

Wait, are we talking about Vortex scope colors or S&B price hikes?

Why not both?

 

[jh2785]

If it's been out for over a year in the military market, I'm curious what differs from their Razor? It seems like 10x erectors require a fair amount more compromises than an 8x. A well executed 1-8 or 2-16 would check a lot of boxes...

I wonder if this 1-10 shorty has the same fish eye at 1x that the Gen iii has?

 

[jh2785]

Which project ended up getting scrapped? The 1-8x was designed well before the compact 1-10x and the 1-8x is significantly bigger.

ILya

You mention a 1-8 …. Are you referring to the strike eagle? Or a entirely new / unreleased 1-8?

 

[koshkin]

You mention a 1-8 …. Are you referring to the strike eagle? Or a entirely new / unreleased 1-8?

The 1-8x that's the basis of the XM157 scope.

ILya

 

[Glassaholic]

The 1-8x that's the basis of the XM157 scope.

ILya

He's referring to this bad boy

Interesting that Vortex went with a 1-8 for the NGSW-FC, my guess is they determined that 1-8 would provide "enough" for the purpose of this platform and 1-8 has slightly less compromises than 1-10, especially in a shorter body...

Regarding the scope of this thread, if Vortex did release a shorty 1-10 it would give the March shorty a run for the money, but (for me) the big advantage of the March is the adjustable parallax/focus which when I compared the Vortex G3 1-10 to the March 1-10 did help at longer distances.

 

[koshkin]

He's referring to this bad boy

View attachment 8010624

Interesting that Vortex went with a 1-8 for the NGSW-FC, my guess is they determined that 1-8 would provide "enough" for the purpose of this platform and 1-8 has slightly less compromises than 1-10, especially in a shorter body...

Regarding the scope of this thread, if Vortex did release a shorty 1-10 it would give the March shorty a run for the money, but (for me) the big advantage of the March is the adjustable parallax/focus which when I compared the Vortex G3 1-10 to the March 1-10 did help at longer distances.

There are many different considerations when you have a scope with a 30mm objective and active reticle.

ILya

 

[AznTactical]

It is a really excellent scope, but it is not currently available to civilians and Vortex has not released any public information on it.

ILya

Did you recently see this "AMG" optic during your Vortex visit in Sept?

 

[jh2785]

The 1-8x that's the basis of the XM157 scope.

ILya

okay yes I forgot about that scope, thanks.

 

[jh2785]

He's referring to this bad boy

View attachment 8010624

Interesting that Vortex went with a 1-8 for the NGSW-FC, my guess is they determined that 1-8 would provide "enough" for the purpose of this platform and 1-8 has slightly less compromises than 1-10, especially in a shorter body...

Regarding the scope of this thread, if Vortex did release a shorty 1-10 it would give the March shorty a run for the money, but (for me) the big advantage of the March is the adjustable parallax/focus which when I compared the Vortex G3 1-10 to the March 1-10 did help at longer distances.

Yep, I thought that might be the one Ilya was referring to. If Vortex could fix that fish eye on 1x ..... I'd be super pumped about the Gen III. I've played with the diopter on the Gen III 1-10 it was still like looking through a port hole window. I'd be super happy with that same scope in 1-8 if it was a flatter 1x picture.

 

[jh2785]

If it's been out for over a year in the military market, I'm curious what differs from their Razor? It seems like 10x erectors require a fair amount more compromises than an 8x. A well executed 1-8 or 2-16 would check a lot of boxes...

Amen ........ a 1-8 would be awesome ...... with a great 1x site picture

 

[Glassaholic]

Amen ........ a 1-8 would be awesome ...... with a great 1x site picture

Isn't that what so many rave over with the NF ATACR 1-8?

 

[TheOE800]

Isn't that what so many rave over with the NF ATACR 1-8?

The ATACR is fairly flat but the FOV is lacking.

 

[jh2785]

The ATACR is fairly flat but the FOV is lacking.

I'd like to look through an ATACR 1-8. The other ATACR's I've looked through - I wasn't super impressed with, given their price and reputation. The Vortex Razor 1-6x24 is about as good as it gets optically, at the price of weight. Kahles K16i is great too. In the higher-mag scopes, I've found the Steiner M-series to be fantastic, especially for their prices in the used market.

 

[TheOE800]

Yes Nightforce is about 20% proud on their prices, at least.

 

[Glassaholic]

The ATACR is fairly flat but the FOV is lacking.

Well that is the tradeoff, if you want wide FOV then you'll probably sacrifice some of that flat field or sharp edge to edge clarity, I have seen this in many scopes. The best I've seen at handling the "best of both worlds" is the TT, but those are long range scopes and not LPVO's. I was very impressed with the ATI SAI6 1-6x24 and they are coming out with a 1-8 model next year and am very anxious to get my hands on one of those. The 1-6 has very good FOV and I don't recall much distortion at 1x, if they can keep similar with a 1-8, that might be the ticket... it also has an anodizing that is much more ideal than Vortex!

 

[jh2785]

Well that is the tradeoff, if you want wide FOV then you'll probably sacrifice some of that flat field or sharp edge to edge clarity, I have seen this in many scopes. The best I've seen at handling the "best of both worlds" is the TT, but those are long range scopes and not LPVO's. I was very impressed with the ATI SAI6 1-6x24 and they are coming out with a 1-8 model next year and am very anxious to get my hands on one of those. The 1-6 has very good FOV and I don't recall much distortion at 1x, if they can keep similar with a 1-8, that might be the ticket... it also has an anodizing that is much more ideal than Vortex!

View attachment 8010916

Very cool, thanks for the info! I was wondering about those SAI's.

 

[TheOE800]

Well that is the tradeoff, if you want wide FOV then you'll probably sacrifice some of that flat field or sharp edge to edge clarity, I have seen this in many scopes. The best I've seen at handling the "best of both worlds" is the TT, but those are long range scopes and not LPVO's. I was very impressed with the ATI SAI6 1-6x24 and they are coming out with a 1-8 model next year and am very anxious to get my hands on one of those. The 1-6 has very good FOV and I don't recall much distortion at 1x, if they can keep similar with a 1-8, that might be the ticket... it also has an anodizing that is much more ideal than Vortex!

View attachment 8010916

It’s all compromises. Even their NX8 product has 10% more FOV.

Very cool, thanks for the info! I was wondering about those SAI's.

Everyone I know with one likes it a lot.

 

[Glassaholic]

It’s all compromises. Even their NX8 product has 10% more FOV.

Everyone I know with one likes it a lot.

Jake just bought one (ATACR 1-8), he's obsessed with them (but more for the reticle I think). Me, I'm content to wait for the SAI8 that will hopefully be what I hope it is...

 

[Burdy]

Well that is the tradeoff, if you want wide FOV then you'll probably sacrifice some of that flat field or sharp edge to edge clarity, I have seen this in many scopes. The best I've seen at handling the "best of both worlds" is the TT, but those are long range scopes and not LPVO's. I was very impressed with the ATI SAI6 1-6x24 and they are coming out with a 1-8 model next year and am very anxious to get my hands on one of those. The 1-6 has very good FOV and I don't recall much distortion at 1x, if they can keep similar with a 1-8, that might be the ticket... it also has an anodizing that is much more ideal than Vortex!

View attachment 8010916

Hopefully they drop the BDCs and give us Mils instead.

 

[TheOE800]

Jake just bought one (ATACR 1-8), he's obsessed with them (but more for the reticle I think). Me, I'm content to wait for the SAI8 that will hopefully be what I hope it is...

If I got them at dealer cost I might have them, but I get them at peasant prices so there’s better out there per dollar for me. Schmidt dual cc blows it out of the water IMO, so that’s what I ended up with.

Hopefully they drop the BDCs and give us Mils instead.

Please god yes. Whose got Armament’s ear and can relate that to them?

 

[mrtoyz]

What’s the story with Armament and the SAI?? Looks interesting minus BDC

 

[Glassaholic]

Hopefully they drop the BDCs and give us Mils instead.

That would make it even more interesting. Unfortunately I think ATI is pretty committed to the BDC world for SAI, but maybe they are listening and the SAI8 will come with both BDC and mil options

 

[Glassaholic]

What’s the story with Armament and the SAI?? Looks interesting minus BDC

SAI is a division of ATI, just like TT and Tenebraex, etc. SAI scopes are OEM'd from Japan

 

[Burdy]

That would make it even more interesting. Unfortunately I think ATI is pretty committed to the BDC world for SAI, but maybe they are listening and the SAI8 will come with both BDC and mil options

I'll be honest, I had really high hopes for the SAI 6 and then when I got one in hand I was a bit disappointed but unfortunately I really can't put into words why. I think the reticle presented a bit small, absent was that "no glass inside" view like say a Razor Gen II or a K16i Kahles. I came away, meh. A 1-8 could change that. I much preferred the same reticle and view of the K18i Kahles vs the K16i just because of how the scope presented on 1x and the resulting reticle scaling.

 

[Burdy]

It cost less than a Schmidt at the time, it was a bargain. That whole gun looks a little spray-coated though, Bill.

Thats plasti-dip.

 

[Glassaholic]

Thats plasti-dip.

??? Do tell?

 

[Burdy]

??? Do tell?

Lol, it was a joke, the first thing I thought of whenever I saw it was "Who in the hell used plasti-dip?!?"

 

[Scott Parks]

I wonder if this 1-10 shorty has the same fish eye at 1x that the Gen iii has?

Hello,
If you have a 1-10 that has "fish eye" at 1x after you have adjusted the diopter at 1x to a true 1x please please contact me personally. I would really like to see it and/or at the very least discuss. I have seen a couple of people make this comment,but I have not been able to see it myself. I would have to guess there something funky with your scope or possibly I am misunderstanding what is being referring to as "fish eye". Either way I would love to understand what you are seeing as it sounds like it's a major concern for you.

Can I ask how you are setting the diopter?

In my experience the 1-10 is very similar to our 1-6 at 1x.

On another note, anyone that has any concerns, questions, or comments with any of our products is more than welcome/encouraged to contact us or myself directly. Message me on here, call 8004vortex, OR if you are close enough to us or passing thru Wisconsin stop into our showroom. We'd love to see any of you for any reason, anytime!

Best Regards
Scott Parks

 

[Hoody2shoes]

Hello,
If you have a 1-10 that has "fish eye" at 1x after you have adjusted the diopter at 1x to a true 1x please please contact me personally. I would really like to see it and/or at the very least discuss. I have seen a couple of people make this comment,but I have not been able to see it myself. I would have to guess there something funky with your scope or possibly I am misunderstanding what is being referring to as "fish eye". Either way I would love to understand what you are seeing as it sounds like it's a major concern for you.

Can I ask how you are setting the diopter?

In my experience the 1-10 is very similar to our 1-6 at 1x.

On another note, anyone that has any concerns, questions, or comments with any of our products is more than welcome/encouraged to contact us or myself directly. Message me on here, call 8004vortex, OR if you are close enough to us or passing thru Wisconsin stop into our showroom. We'd love to see any of you for any reason, anytime!

Best Regards
Scott Parks

Wait, are you suggesting on a ffp scope to adjust the diopter at 1x instead of max magnification?

 

[koshkin]

Wait, are you suggesting on a ffp scope to adjust the diopter at 1x instead of max magnification?

With FFP scopes in general, eyepiece finetuning should be done on some lower magnification. With LPVOs specifically, whether FFP or SFP, fine-tuning should be done on 1x.

ILya

 

[Scott Parks]

Wait, are you suggesting on a ffp scope to adjust the diopter at 1x instead of max magnification?

I'm not suggesting it for FFP scopes. However I am saying it is generally necessary on all SFP and FFP 1x scopes if you want 1x to present as a true 1x. In this method we are not looking at the reticle focus. We are simply picking an object(s) to look at on 1x while adjusting the diopter until the object presents itself as the same size with both of your eyes open. Another method is to look at an object at 1x while quickly moving the scope in and out of your view observing that same object and adjusting the diopter until the object presents itself as the same size with or without looking through the scope(IMO, the former is a bit easier to do. The latter takes some practice).

Generally speaking, the traditional method of getting best reticle focus at mid to high mag is not the best way to adjust the diopter on a 1x scope In a 1x scope no matter what the high end goes to it is first and foremost a 1x scope. 1x is the priority of the optical design. Everything above 1x is icing on the cake so to speak(this is a vast over simplification, but true nonetheless).


-Scott

 

[jh2785]

Hello,
If you have a 1-10 that has "fish eye" at 1x after you have adjusted the diopter at 1x to a true 1x please please contact me personally. I would really like to see it and/or at the very least discuss. I have seen a couple of people make this comment,but I have not been able to see it myself. I would have to guess there something funky with your scope or possibly I am misunderstanding what is being referring to as "fish eye". Either way I would love to understand what you are seeing as it sounds like it's a major concern for you.

Can I ask how you are setting the diopter?

In my experience the 1-10 is very similar to our 1-6 at 1x.

On another note, anyone that has any concerns, questions, or comments with any of our products is more than welcome/encouraged to contact us or myself directly. Message me on here, call 8004vortex, OR if you are close enough to us or passing thru Wisconsin stop into our showroom. We'd love to see any of you for any reason, anytime!

Best Regards
Scott Parks

Hi Scott, I haven't owned a Razor Gen III 1-10; my only experience is looking through them on at least 3 separate occasions. The most recent of which, I tried adjusting the diopter and I don't recall the result being significantly different. But I'd like to go and look through it again and be more intentional about adjusting it at 1x to see how it looks. Thanks for chiming in

 

[jh2785]

I'm not suggesting it for FFP scopes. However I am saying it is generally necessary on all SFP and FFP 1x scopes if you want 1x to present as a true 1x. In this method we are not looking at the reticle focus. We are simply picking an object(s) to look at on 1x while adjusting the diopter until the object presents itself as the same size with both of your eyes open. Another method is to look at an object at 1x while quickly moving the scope in and out of your view observing that same object and adjusting the diopter until the object presents itself as the same size with or without looking through the scope(IMO, the former is a bit easier to do. The latter takes some practice).

Generally speaking, the traditional method of getting best reticle focus at mid to high mag is not the best way to adjust the diopter on a 1x scope In a 1x scope no matter what the high end goes to it is first and foremost a 1x scope. 1x is the priority of the optical design. Everything above 1x is icing on the cake so to speak(this is a vast over simplification, but true nonetheless).


-Scott

Scott, what can you tell us about the 1-10 shorty?