Vortex Razor HD 5-20 compared to Burris XTRIII 5-30

[Hkmiller]

I am in the market for new scope, and think I am going with the new XTRIII 5-30, but have not looked thru one.

I looked thru a vortex razor HD 5-20 this weekend at range at 400 yrds and I could see the target clear enough to see the rings, which I cannot do with my Arken 6-24 - Arken fuzzy and shows a lot of mirage. I was impressed with the vortex at 20 power.

My question is will the XTRIII be equal or better view that the vortex?

 

[Hickswr]

XTR3 will definitely be superior to the Gen 1 Razor you are describing.

XTR3 is at least equal in clarity with the Gen 2 Razor based on my comparisons.

 

[Birddog6424]

Hickswr is right. I have a Gen I Razor on a 338 Lapua mag. The XTRIII has much better FOV and better clarity.

It's always been a very close comparison between the XTRIII and the Gen II Razor. To my eyes, the Gen II Razor always has a little better color. A very slight nod to brightness and clarity, and of course FOV to the Burris. But its always pretty close.

 

[Rob01]

Yup I'd definitely go XTRIII over the Gen I Razor. You get a more modern design as well as the glass.

 

[spife7980]

Gen 1 razor:

 

[Hkmiller]

Yup I'd definitely go XTRIII over the Gen I Razor. You get a more modern design as well as the glass.

Yup I'd definitely go XTRIII over the Gen I Razor. You get a more modern design as well as the glass.

Not looking to get the razor gen I. That is just the scope I looked thru at the range.

 

[longshot2000]

I am glad I read all the replies, I was thinking Razor HD 5-20, is this something new? . Now, I remember. I am tough on scopes. I am not a Burris fan, but the XTR3 has opened my mind to not think so narrow. It is a very good scope, and a very good price. The Razor Gen1 was something I was never impressed with. It is probably not as good as a PST Gen2 (which is darn good for the price). The progression Vortex has made on the Razor line from Gen1 to Gen2 to Gen3 is each a leap, to the point where the Gen3 should have a different name all together.

 

[sirhitalot]

Is the non-illuminated XTR3 much better than the illuminated? Ive understood the non-illuminated is US made, but do they share the same glass etc? Due to the lifetime warranty im not worried about general build quality

 

[Hickswr]

Is the non-illuminated XTR3 much better than the illuminated? Ive understood the non-illuminated is US made, but do they share the same glass etc? Due to the lifetime warranty im not worried about general build quality

Had both, kept the illuminated version in case I wanted to hunt with it.

Compared side by side on numerous occasions and couldn’t tell any difference between the two quality wise.

If the glass had been better in the USA version then I would have most certainly kept it since the scope is used for PRS 99% of the time.

 

[Hkmiller]

Is the non-illuminated XTR3 much better than the illuminated? Ive understood the non-illuminated is US made, but do they share the same glass etc? Due to the lifetime warranty im not worried about general build quality

I have both, the US, non illuminated in 3.3-18 and the illuminated in 5.5-30 and I cannot tell a difference in quantity. The magnification ring on the the illuminated is easier to turn.

 

[Birddog6424]

Same components in both versions. The glass is sourced from the same location with the same quality standards.

Crazy as it sounds to say it, the illuminated version from the Phillipines is VERY well done versus the stateside scope. When they switched to that location they toned down the aggressive knurling, and smoothed out the turrets, parallax, and magnification ring that were sometimes stiff in the American version.

Side by side, my Phillipines scope is every bit as nice, if not a little nicer than my handful of the American made versions. And available at a lower price!

The illuminated XTRIII is a win win for Burris and Burris scope buyers.

 

[Skeptic1]

Due to the lifetime warranty im not worried about general build quality

You didn't really mean to say this did you?

 

[Max_trax]

Same components in both versions. The glass is sourced from the same location with the same quality standards.

Crazy as it sounds to say it, the illuminated version from the Phillipines is VERY well done versus the stateside scope. When they switched to that location they toned down the aggressive knurling, and smoothed out the turrets, parallax, and magnification ring that were sometimes stiff in the American version.

Side by side, my Phillipines scope is every bit as nice, if not a little nicer than my handful of the American made versions. And available at a lower price!

The illuminated XTRIII is a win win for Burris and Burris scope buyers.

Toned *down* the knurling? Jeezus I'd hate to have seen the original. I just picked up an XTR3i 3.3-18 to compare side by side with a razor LHT 4.5-22 for hunting use and am heavily leaning towards the XTR. My only gripes are the sharp and stiff AF parallax ring and the elevation knob clicks while more tactile also require more force to overcome so I find it much easier to overrun my target setting by a click or two.

Everything else - eyebox, optical performance in the first/last half hour of light, FOV, reticle, illumination, etc I find the XTR to have the slight edge. For me it's really down to if it's worth the extra 8oz for a mountain rifle and I'm leaning yes.

 

[Birddog6424]

Toned *down* the knurling? Jeezus I'd hate to have seen the original. I just picked up an XTR3i 3.3-18 to compare side by side with a razor LHT 4.5-22 for hunting use and am heavily leaning towards the XTR. My only gripes are the sharp and stiff AF parallax ring and the elevation knob clicks while more tactile also require more force to overcome so I find it much easier to overrun my target setting by a click or two.

Everything else - eyebox, optical performance in the first/last half hour of light, FOV, reticle, illumination, etc I find the XTR to have the slight edge. For me it's really down to if it's worth the extra 8oz for a mountain rifle and I'm leaning yes.

Sounds like you somehow managed to get one of the early ones. The first wave that came from the Phillipines was still a little more aggressive than they wanted. Subsequent versions are pretty good.

I have one of each. They gave me one that was so aggressive they weren't going to even release them. But for the cost of $0 I wasn't turning it down. The second one feels as it should.

 

[Hkmiller]

Sounds like you somehow managed to get one of the early ones. The first wave that came from the Phillipines was still a little more aggressive than they wanted. Subsequent versions are pretty good.

I have one of each. They gave me one that was so aggressive they weren't going to even release them. But for the cost of $0 I wasn't turning it down. The second one feels as it should.

My Philli model has some pretty sharp knurling. But I can live with it. It was purchase in December.

 

[Rob01]

I need to get one of the standard XTR IIIi scopes. I have a Pro and just ordered another but want a regular 5.5-30 to try it against it. Maybe I will see one at a match.

 

[FredHammer]

I need to get one of the standard XTR IIIi scopes. I have a Pro and just ordered another but want a regular 5.5-30 to try it against it. Maybe I will see one at a match.

How's the Pro compare to the XTR III? I had XTR II 5-25, went to XTR III and very happy.

 

[Rob01]

How's the Pro compare to the XTR III? I had XTR II 5-25, went to XTR III and very happy.

From speaking to some people I trust the Pro has slightly better glass and I really like the speed dial with 12 mils per turn and the tooless zeroing. I have only put the Pro up against a few other scope but not the XTRIIIi yet.