Has anyone had a side by side with the standard Vortex Viper and the Vortex Viper PST? Of course I know the PST has the matching target turrets, illuminated reticle, option of FFP and nicer reticle but how about glass quality? Is the glass that much better on the PST? Clearer, crisper, better color? Lets say for example the 6-24, how much are the normal Viper owners losing out in glass quality by not being in the never ending backorder line for the PST?
Rifle Scopes Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
- Thread starter ls1mtz
- Start date
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
PST glass quality isn't leaps and bounds ahead of the regular viper. What you get with the PST is a hell of a lot more features.
If glass quality is what you're after you really have to spend in the 1500-2k dollar range to get an appreciable difference from mid-range scopes like the viper.
If you're looking for a mid-range tactical scope consider the weaver 3-15 FFP, it is available and from all accounts is a decent scope.
PST glass quality isn't leaps and bounds ahead of the regular viper. What you get with the PST is a hell of a lot more features.
If glass quality is what you're after you really have to spend in the 1500-2k dollar range to get an appreciable difference from mid-range scopes like the viper.
If you're looking for a mid-range tactical scope consider the weaver 3-15 FFP, it is available and from all accounts is a decent scope.
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
I believe that you have to be very specific when you speak of "PST glass quality". There is growing evidence that the 4-16 and the 6-24, although reported by Vortex to have the "same glass", as a finished product provide VERY different optical performance.
The first clue was when Jon A got his 4-16 and reported mediocre performance. I've read a few anecdotal reports which seemed to confirm since. So I was very excited when I got the chance to put the two side by side with the Weaver 3-15 and my Razor 5-20.:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2511913
I'll summarize. The PST 6-24 had PHENOMENAL glass. As good or better than the Razor. The Weaver was very close to both. The PST 4-16 was *NOTICEABLY* flatter, lacked contrast and sharpness, had less resolving power and was simply not in the same league as the other three. From memory, I'd put it on par or worse than the Viper 6.5-20 I had, which really left me unimpressed.
John
I believe that you have to be very specific when you speak of "PST glass quality". There is growing evidence that the 4-16 and the 6-24, although reported by Vortex to have the "same glass", as a finished product provide VERY different optical performance.
The first clue was when Jon A got his 4-16 and reported mediocre performance. I've read a few anecdotal reports which seemed to confirm since. So I was very excited when I got the chance to put the two side by side with the Weaver 3-15 and my Razor 5-20.:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2511913
I'll summarize. The PST 6-24 had PHENOMENAL glass. As good or better than the Razor. The Weaver was very close to both. The PST 4-16 was *NOTICEABLY* flatter, lacked contrast and sharpness, had less resolving power and was simply not in the same league as the other three. From memory, I'd put it on par or worse than the Viper 6.5-20 I had, which really left me unimpressed.
John
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
I have a SFP 6-24X50 PST. The glass in it is very good and noticeably better than the Viper. My shooting buddy has the 6-20X (I believe it is) Viper on one of his rifles and I can see the difference.
What's been driving me nuts about my PST is that on 6X the eye relief changes so much that I can't get a comfortable cheek weld. Ah, maybe it's just my scope. Mine is on its way back to Vortex for a second time.
Quite frankly, I'm running my PST on a rimfire rifle. If I had it to do again, I'd just get the Viper and put the rest of the money to something else or go all out and get a Nightforce or IOR.
I have a SFP 6-24X50 PST. The glass in it is very good and noticeably better than the Viper. My shooting buddy has the 6-20X (I believe it is) Viper on one of his rifles and I can see the difference.
What's been driving me nuts about my PST is that on 6X the eye relief changes so much that I can't get a comfortable cheek weld. Ah, maybe it's just my scope. Mine is on its way back to Vortex for a second time.
Quite frankly, I'm running my PST on a rimfire rifle. If I had it to do again, I'd just get the Viper and put the rest of the money to something else or go all out and get a Nightforce or IOR.
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TonyAngel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What's been driving me nuts about my PST is that on 6X the eye relief changes so much that I can't get a comfortable cheek weld. Ah, maybe it's just my scope. </div></div>
Nope. Noticed the same thing. 24X cheek weld was perfect for prone. Dial 6x and had to move my head... BUT... turns out 6x is perfect for off hand and field positions.... maybe Vortex actually did it on purpose?
John
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TonyAngel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What's been driving me nuts about my PST is that on 6X the eye relief changes so much that I can't get a comfortable cheek weld. Ah, maybe it's just my scope. </div></div>
Nope. Noticed the same thing. 24X cheek weld was perfect for prone. Dial 6x and had to move my head... BUT... turns out 6x is perfect for off hand and field positions.... maybe Vortex actually did it on purpose?
John
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I'll summarize. The PST 6-24 had PHENOMENAL glass. As good or better than the Razor. The Weaver was very close to both. The <span style="color: #FF0000"><span style="text-decoration: underline">4-16</span>FFP</span> PST was *NOTICEABLY* flatter, lacked contrast and sharpness, had less resolving power and was simply not in the same league as the other three. From memory, I'd put it on par or worse than the Viper 6.5-20 I had, which really left me unimpressed.
John </div></div>
I threw in a little edit for ya John
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I'll summarize. The PST 6-24 had PHENOMENAL glass. As good or better than the Razor. The Weaver was very close to both. The <span style="color: #FF0000"><span style="text-decoration: underline">4-16</span>FFP</span> PST was *NOTICEABLY* flatter, lacked contrast and sharpness, had less resolving power and was simply not in the same league as the other three. From memory, I'd put it on par or worse than the Viper 6.5-20 I had, which really left me unimpressed.
John </div></div>
I threw in a little edit for ya John
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jonaddis84</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I'll summarize. The PST 6-24 had PHENOMENAL glass. As good or better than the Razor. The Weaver was very close to both. The <span style="color: #FF0000"><span style="text-decoration: underline">4-16</span>FFP</span> PST was *NOTICEABLY* flatter, lacked contrast and sharpness, had less resolving power and was simply not in the same league as the other three. From memory, I'd put it on par or worse than the Viper 6.5-20 I had, which really left me unimpressed.
John </div></div>
I threw in a little edit for ya John </div></div>
I hope your edit is what he meant to say. Had me a little confused for a minute. Went from PHENOMENAL and as good or better than the Razor and Weaver to not being in the same league as the other two.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jonaddis84</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I'll summarize. The PST 6-24 had PHENOMENAL glass. As good or better than the Razor. The Weaver was very close to both. The <span style="color: #FF0000"><span style="text-decoration: underline">4-16</span>FFP</span> PST was *NOTICEABLY* flatter, lacked contrast and sharpness, had less resolving power and was simply not in the same league as the other three. From memory, I'd put it on par or worse than the Viper 6.5-20 I had, which really left me unimpressed.
John </div></div>
I threw in a little edit for ya John </div></div>
I hope your edit is what he meant to say. Had me a little confused for a minute. Went from PHENOMENAL and as good or better than the Razor and Weaver to not being in the same league as the other two.
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
It is, if you read his review that he linked, thats how I know.
It is, if you read his review that he linked, thats how I know.
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
It's a great review that he linked.
It's a great review that he linked.
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jonaddis84</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I'll summarize. The PST 6-24 had PHENOMENAL glass. As good or better than the Razor. The Weaver was very close to both. The <span style="color: #FF0000"><span style="text-decoration: underline">4-16</span>FFP</span> PST was *NOTICEABLY* flatter, lacked contrast and sharpness, had less resolving power and was simply not in the same league as the other three. From memory, I'd put it on par or worse than the Viper 6.5-20 I had, which really left me unimpressed.
John </div></div>
I threw in a little edit for ya John </div></div>
Thanks Jon... thats' what I get for trying to type a post while getting Facebook messages from my son that they're under mortar attack.
Like I said... we have to be very specific when we mention PST's Then I forget a delimiter.
Good catch.
John
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jonaddis84</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I'll summarize. The PST 6-24 had PHENOMENAL glass. As good or better than the Razor. The Weaver was very close to both. The <span style="color: #FF0000"><span style="text-decoration: underline">4-16</span>FFP</span> PST was *NOTICEABLY* flatter, lacked contrast and sharpness, had less resolving power and was simply not in the same league as the other three. From memory, I'd put it on par or worse than the Viper 6.5-20 I had, which really left me unimpressed.
John </div></div>
I threw in a little edit for ya John </div></div>
Thanks Jon... thats' what I get for trying to type a post while getting Facebook messages from my son that they're under mortar attack.
Like I said... we have to be very specific when we mention PST's Then I forget a delimiter.
John
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'll summarize. The PST 6-24 had PHENOMENAL glass. As good or better than the Razor. The Weaver was very close to both. The PST (4-16) was *NOTICEABLY* flatter, lacked contrast and sharpness, had less resolving power and was simply not in the same league as the other three. From memory, I'd put it on par or worse than the Viper 6.5-20 I had, which really left me unimpressed.John </div></div>
Aha! Good to know! I've been waffling over whether to get the PST 4-16 or the PST 6-24. Now I know I want the PST 6-24.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'll summarize. The PST 6-24 had PHENOMENAL glass. As good or better than the Razor. The Weaver was very close to both. The PST (4-16) was *NOTICEABLY* flatter, lacked contrast and sharpness, had less resolving power and was simply not in the same league as the other three. From memory, I'd put it on par or worse than the Viper 6.5-20 I had, which really left me unimpressed.John </div></div>
Aha! Good to know! I've been waffling over whether to get the PST 4-16 or the PST 6-24. Now I know I want the PST 6-24.
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
Im not understanding how there can possibly be a difference in the glass quality seeing as vortex has confirmed that they put the exact same glass in both scopes. Im just not seeing how they could be as different as people make them out to be when they have the same glass? From what the review in the link says the guy took a very scientific approach to this glass quality test and did everything to make it equal so i dont think that any inconsistencies on his part were to blame but still something doesnt add up.
Im not understanding how there can possibly be a difference in the glass quality seeing as vortex has confirmed that they put the exact same glass in both scopes. Im just not seeing how they could be as different as people make them out to be when they have the same glass? From what the review in the link says the guy took a very scientific approach to this glass quality test and did everything to make it equal so i dont think that any inconsistencies on his part were to blame but still something doesnt add up.
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cooper623</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Im not understanding how there can possibly be a difference in the glass quality seeing as vortex has confirmed that they put the exact same glass in both scopes.</div></div>
You need to do a little reading on complex optical systems. Optical performance *starts* with glass quality, but the manner in which the glass is implemented in the overall design is a very large factor in how the optic performs.
There is also the possibility that the glass is *not* as good and Vortex is working on that and not talking. We'll probably never know.
All I know is that the 4-16 PST I looked at was substandard by every standard by which I can measure an optic.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cooper623</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Of course things always look better and resolve better on higher magnification </div></div>
The side-by-side evaluation I did was at 16x on all scopes (15x on the Weaver).
John
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cooper623</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Im not understanding how there can possibly be a difference in the glass quality seeing as vortex has confirmed that they put the exact same glass in both scopes.</div></div>
You need to do a little reading on complex optical systems. Optical performance *starts* with glass quality, but the manner in which the glass is implemented in the overall design is a very large factor in how the optic performs.
There is also the possibility that the glass is *not* as good and Vortex is working on that and not talking. We'll probably never know.
All I know is that the 4-16 PST I looked at was substandard by every standard by which I can measure an optic.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cooper623</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Of course things always look better and resolve better on higher magnification </div></div>
The side-by-side evaluation I did was at 16x on all scopes (15x on the Weaver).
John
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
ya i checked back on the reivew and corrected the statement about the higher mag. Alright, Ill read about it, but it still seems to me that they would be implemented the same way in the same scope. Of course I dont know how the change in magnification range plays into how the glass is "implemented" but i guess that could be it.
ya i checked back on the reivew and corrected the statement about the higher mag. Alright, Ill read about it, but it still seems to me that they would be implemented the same way in the same scope. Of course I dont know how the change in magnification range plays into how the glass is "implemented" but i guess that could be it.
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
The 6-24 has different dimensions vs. the 4-16, that might have something to do with it. Really too bad they can't get these scopes out there in quantity, every PST I have seen has been an excellent scope.
The 6-24 has different dimensions vs. the 4-16, that might have something to do with it. Really too bad they can't get these scopes out there in quantity, every PST I have seen has been an excellent scope.
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
In the 4-16's defense, I have seen other reviews where it performs just as well compared to a 6-24, possibly the scope John used was sub-par.
In the 4-16's defense, I have seen other reviews where it performs just as well compared to a 6-24, possibly the scope John used was sub-par.
Re: Vortex Viper vs PST glass quality
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jonaddis84</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I'll summarize. The PST 6-24 had PHENOMENAL glass. As good or better than the Razor. The Weaver was very close to both. The <span style="color: #FF0000"><span style="text-decoration: underline">4-16</span>FFP</span> PST was *NOTICEABLY* flatter, lacked contrast and sharpness, had less resolving power and was simply not in the same league as the other three. From memory, I'd put it on par or worse than the Viper 6.5-20 I had, which really left me unimpressed.
John </div></div>
I threw in a little edit for ya John </div></div>
If you read the review again you'll notice that the 4-16x50 is SFP not FFP Here's the quote:
"I just recently received my PST 6-24 FFP mil/mil for my .260 build. A friend has a PST 4-16 SFP Mil/Mil and Paul Stafford just put a Weaver 3-15 FFP Mil/Mil Tac on his spanking new Stiller-actioned 300WM "
So I'm wondering with all this talk of the 4-16 not being as sharp as the 6-24 is like comparing apples to oranges seeing as its the SFP version versus the FFP.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jonaddis84</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I'll summarize. The PST 6-24 had PHENOMENAL glass. As good or better than the Razor. The Weaver was very close to both. The <span style="color: #FF0000"><span style="text-decoration: underline">4-16</span>FFP</span> PST was *NOTICEABLY* flatter, lacked contrast and sharpness, had less resolving power and was simply not in the same league as the other three. From memory, I'd put it on par or worse than the Viper 6.5-20 I had, which really left me unimpressed.
John </div></div>
I threw in a little edit for ya John </div></div>
If you read the review again you'll notice that the 4-16x50 is SFP not FFP Here's the quote:
"I just recently received my PST 6-24 FFP mil/mil for my .260 build. A friend has a PST 4-16 SFP Mil/Mil and Paul Stafford just put a Weaver 3-15 FFP Mil/Mil Tac on his spanking new Stiller-actioned 300WM "
So I'm wondering with all this talk of the 4-16 not being as sharp as the 6-24 is like comparing apples to oranges seeing as its the SFP version versus the FFP.
Similar threads
