Rifle Scopes Vortex Razor HD 4.5-27 Gen II 1st impressions and a question on parallax

[ReaperDriver]

I finally received my Razor HD Gen 2 scope from Optics Planet. It's going on a gas gun build that I've been waiting on a part. But in the meantime I finally got the scope out to the range today to look through it and compare it to other optics. It's not mounted on anything yet, but I set it on the top of my S&B PMII 5-25 turret using the flat part on the bottom of the razor to set on. I had them both pointed at a steel IPSC plate at 1200 yds.

1st impressions were underwhelming, BUT in all fairness I was comparing it to a scope that is double the price. So it's not a fair comparo. I could see individual hits on the steel plate at 1200 just like I could with the S&B, but it was just not quite as clear nor did it "pop" like the S&B. But the clarity is totally adequate for long range. As I said, I'm just spoiled by the German optics.

My Question is: On the parallax dial - the "in focus" setting did not correspond to the actual range. For instance, to get the sharpest picture at 1K and beyond, the parallax setting was at about 300 yds. I would have expected to have it set on infinity. When I did dial to infinity, the picture got slightly blurrier. So the scope doesn't track the ranges well on the parallax knob. When I do the same with both of my S&Bs, I can tweak the parallax knob to be perfectly in focus and the knob settings almost perfectly correspond to the range on the dial pretty much from 50 yds all the way to infinity. Is the Vortex's behavior normal? Is there a way to calibrate the parallax knob to match the actual ranges? What I'm afraid of is the non-matching parallax will hurt my accuracy if I'm not perfectly behind the scope.

 

[Rocketvapor]

I'm going to suggest something totally backasswards for you to try
Find something about 1000yds away.
Set parallax dial to close to infinity. It's not a ranging device, just an approximation.
It might not be the best setting for the sharpest image. Just close.
Now, adjust the Diopter for the sharpest image @ 1000 temporarily ignoring reticle focus.
Work the two a little until you get acceptable focus on the 'target' and the reticle.

 

[Longrange403]

The numbers being off is normal, that far off tho is not. I find adjusting the diopter properly first does make the margin for error on the parallax less however. This exact issue is why I prefer scopes like kahles that have a wedge instead of distance on the parallax knob. If it does have numbers tho I like the mk5 “adjustable” parallax knob that you can set the numbers to match the distance to target

 

[PinesAndProjectiles]

In my experience, I could care less if the parallax numbers match the actual distance to the target, however, when you pay that much for a scope, you expect them to be close.

I would also make sure to set the diopter correctly.

I will aim the scope at a bright background, typically the sky.

With the parallax set to infinity, you should be able to close your eyes, and open them just briefly, and in that short amount of time, you should be able to quickly focus on the reticle.

If it takes some time for your eyes to adjust in order to focus on the reticle, your diopter isn't set correctly.

There is a thread here somewhere that goes step by step to accomplish this.

And it's been a while, so I may have missed something, but you get the gist.

 

[Rob01]

Markings on parallax knobs are rarely correct. I have had 7 S&B scopes and only one was close. That is why a lot of companies just put dots or hashmarks. I don't look at the numbers but set parallax by looking through the scope.

 

[DownhillFromHere]

I went through this with one of my Vortex scopes early on in the journey down the rifle rabbit hole... whether it was a Viper PST or a Razor, I don't recall. Anyway, I called Vortex about it and the response was just as described in earlier posts here - it's an approximation. The rep even said they were considering taking the numbers off the dial because so many people think the number on the dial should match the range.

I don't even think about it anymore.

As regards optical clarity... I bought a ZCO 5-27x56 last year while the free-Spuhr special was going on. It's a great scope - I love it, especially having 15 mils a turn on the "up" knob and big ol' numbers I can see with my cataract-surgery'ed eyes. I've had buddies look through the ZCO and Razor at 500-meter steel; the consensus was the ZCO has better clarity out at the edges but the two are pretty close in the center. Admittedly, 500 meters (540 yards) is pretty close in.

The ZCO has an edge in contrast... I remember a match where a set of plates was hung from a bar with pieces of fire hose - like a KYL set - at something like 750 yards. The hose pieces were painted yellow. The plates were gray from being shot dozens of times. The whole array was set against a gray-black dirt berm which was in turn in the shade of trees. North Carolina summertime haze. In other words, plates were really hard to discern. With my Razor, I couldn't see the plates at all. I could barely see the yellow paint on the hose, so I shot at a point under it.

That was going through my mind when I bought the ZCO. I love it... but I have another Razor arriving today to replace my last Viper PST, which will become a spare. The ZCO is better, yes, and it lives on my primary match rifle. But, to me, it's not double-plus the price better (and I had a half-off cert from a prize table for the Razor...).