New Vortex 1-6 optic

[Blake 50]

I wish I would have seen it too! I'm looking for a 7.62mm reticle. Was that what you had?

Negative. Had the 55gr 556 reticle. Nice glass but prefer the vortex gen 2 1-6 or steiner mxi1-5.

 

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

 

 

[fatty 241]

Any updates on availability?

 

Everywhere I can find it is listed as back-ordered for a while.  

[fatty 241]

crap.. a lot of websites say it's not available until November

[High Exposure 5,664]

I spoke with the LE Sales rep at Vortex yesterday. He estimated a 3 month wait if I ordered today.

[fatty 241]

wow that sucks!  wondering if Optics planet will still be able to ship next month as stated on their site

[Vlad G 345]

I spoke with the LE Sales rep at Vortex yesterday. He estimated a 3 month wait if I ordered today.

 

 

Dude ... You have to take a look through my Razor HD II at some point, cause in 3 months you can probably squeeze enough overtime to buy the better scope

[High Exposure 5,664]

Dude ... You have to take a look through my Razor HD II at some point, cause in 3 months you can probably squeeze enough overtime to buy the better scope

My buddy has one. I shot it when he first got it. It is "teh awesome". I just can't justify spending the $$ on it. It won't be going on a work gun, so a lower quality is OK.

 

Besides,if I work more OT to save up some dough, it is going to other things. I want a 1-6 optix, but I don't want one 5 times more expensive.

 

Yet....

[sosa9999 5]

Well, I placed my order on Aug 17 and received an email today that it will ship. WoooHoooo!!!! can wait. OOOPppps I need to order the mount now. 

[sosa9999 5]

received it and it looks good, eye relief is forgiving and 1x magnification looks good. I can wait to hit the range this weekend.   

[Krdshrk 3,877]

How's the weight on it?

[sosa9999 5]

scope 17.6 oz, mount 8.7 oz 

 

I had a Primary Arms reddot before, so this does adds some wait to it. 

[Krdshrk 3,877]

Yeah that sounds a bit chunky.  I have the Bushnell AR 1-4x24 and it's about as heavy - same mount.  Might go back to red dot...  we'll see.

[ChrisJM981 924]

Yeah that sounds a bit chunky.  I have the Bushnell AR 1-4x24 and it's about as heavy - same mount.  Might go back to red dot...  we'll see.

 

I have the Aimpoint PRO. Hopefully I can find a good ophthalmologist to make the dot clear. Glasses are cheaper than an ACOG. 

[ronhonda 86]

so who can tell me where i can get one without the various back order dates floating round?

[bhunted 887]

I have the Aimpoint PRO. Hopefully I can find a good ophthalmologist to make the dot clear. Glasses are cheaper than an ACOG.

They can make it work. Bring the red dot with you and explain to them what you want the outcome to be. I ended up with 3 way progressives. Work well for me. In some cases, they won't be able to get the dot perfect but almost. I have all the above with early stages of cataracts. So I had a comet tail. With the glasses, i can refine the brightness of the dot to be almost pin point.

Iron sights are almost perfect and I can see a fly's ass at a hundred yards with a scope. Where before I couldn't see a target at a 100 yards with just my bare eyes.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sosa9999 5]

so who can tell me where i can get one without the various back order dates floating round?

You can contact Vortex and see if they can tell you who may have them in stock. I just ordered mine from Cabelas and waited.

[High Exposure 5,664]

Mine arrived today. I have an ADM Recon-X mount for it, probably get it to the range sometime next week.

 

Feels like a quality optic. The glass is clear and the reticle is bright enough, although a little busy for my taste. Not bad for > $280.

 

Range report when I get it sighted in.

[Eric. 9]

Rick,

 

I'd like to hear your opinion comparing the pros vs cons of the Vortex SE to an Aimpoint Pro with a magnifier. I know you don't have much variable scope experience, but I believe you have a lot of time on an Aimpoint?

 

Thanks.

 

Eric

Mine arrived today. I have an ADM Recon-X mount for it, probably get it to the range sometime next week.

 

Feels like a quality optic. The glass is clear and the reticle is bright enough, although a little busy for my taste. Not bad for > $280.

 

Range report when I get it sighted in.

[mrg455 6]

Has anyone seen these under the $325ish range? I think Sportsman Guide had them under $270, but it was only for a few hours....must have been lowered in error.

[silverado427 10,708]

received it and it looks good, eye relief is forgiving and 1x magnification looks good. I can wait to hit the range this weekend.   

Whats up with that serial number.

[tattooo 220]

00000 ....is kinda strange

[sosa9999 5]

Photoshopped it

[Vlad G 345]

I got to play with one this weekend. 

 

I like the weight, price, reticle, and glass (for the price). 

I did not like the eye box, field of view, and illuminated brightness. 

 

I think it is a A LOT of scope for the money. It has made 5 or 6 (or 10?) different scopes on the market obsolete.  I personally like the reticle a lot, with the caveat that I like it for a scope with mediocre or poor illumination. In fairly bright light the built in illumination is mostly worthless, but this is true for most if not all scopes under $800. The wider thicker circle helps reflect whatever little illumination there is back to the shooter, and for most cases the black circle is good enough for close up fast shooting.  The center of the reticle is good, it is basically the same idea as the more expensive HD reticle, plus a little 100 yard numb and no center dot.

 

The biggest downside is that the smaller optic makes for a less forgiving eye box, I can take my HD equipped rifle and throw it up to my face and it almost doesn't matter how and where I do it, I'll probably have a good and clear picture. The same is not true with this scope  . If you get a REALLY consistent cheek weld, you are good to go,  but with a bit too much visible black ring, I'm spoiled by the HD which pretty much disappears out of view.  

 

Overall I think it is a very nice scope, considering the money, and I'll probably get at least one for practice guns. 

 

If you want something to play with at the range, try 3gun in tacoptics, uses it on a backup gun, absolutely buy it, but don't expect it to be as awesome as scopes 4 times its price or more. 

[Eric. 9]

Thanks for the review, Vlad.

 

I had a few questions-

 

How do you like the horseshoe reticle and is it obtrusive?

 

How would you compare it to a red dot optic,as far as how quick it is to acquire the target?

 

Do you have any idea what the battery life is?

[Vlad G 345]

How do you like the horseshoe reticle and is it obtrusive?

 

How would you compare it to a red dot optic,as far as how quick it is to acquire the target?

 

Do you have any idea what the battery life is?

 

The horseshoe is .. appropriately sized? Its point is to aid with close in fast aiming and reflect some of the illumination in low light in absence of a very bright illumination.  At close range it provides enough information for quick aiming, at longer distances you are focusing on the inner crosshairs so it isn't really involved. Do I want it? In a low illumination scope, absolutely. In bright scope, not so much.

 

It is slower then a red dot, for two reasons. First the scope doesn't have a bright as the sun red dot to draw your eye, some of the higher end scopes come close. Secondly, the eye box is not as forgiving as a nearly parallax free reddot or the bigger scopes.  That said, with practice and a solid cheek weld, it can probably be faster then most people think, specially in good light conditions.

 

No idea on battery. Based on the type of scope it is, I'd say 100-200h. The good news is if the battery goes out you still have the reticle.  On scopes like that one I hardly ever bother with illumination unless it is a dark house or something

[bignic83 0]

Have you tried the Viper PST 1-4 in the past? If so, how does it compare? I have the Viper 1-4 with the TMCQ reticle. I am curious how that compares to the Strike Eagle's BDC reticle.

[Vlad G 345]

I've tried the PST, and I own an Razor HD.  Please keep in mind there has been some time since I last used the PST so I'm working from memory/impressions here so my opinion might be different then a different person's and might be slightly flawed.  

 

My impression is that the PST 1-4 has better field of view, eye relief and glass. The Strike Eagle gets you another 2x and (for me) a better reticle, for less money.   

 

If I was choosing between the two, it would depend on intended application. For a 0 to 200 yard general purpose scope I think the 1-4 is a better scope, because I think it will be faster close up due to the glass and eye relief. If I wanted a scope that would let me make hits all the way to 500yards and further while maintaining 1x capability I'd take the Strike Eagle. Leaving durability aside or considering them equal (which may or may not be true, I dunno) I would choose the 1-4 for a "self defense" rifle and the 1-6 for a DMR/3gun/etc rifle. 

 

But as I said, I've haven't tried them back to back so my impressions may be skewed. 

 

As to the reticle, personally I much prefer a BDC reticle for a low amplification scope. To my mind the quick and easy "no thinking required" BDC is better suited for the AR platform's effective range, the milling reticles are probably better suited for precision rifles and longer ranges and finer degrees of ranging. But that is just my opinion. 

[bignic83 0]

I have been considering a BDC scope for my next build. Thanks for the info, much appreciated.

[Eric. 9]

I still want to try one, but with all the positive reviews, I may just buy it and call it a day.  After all, we're talking about $300.  Another point, from all the reviews is that you are getting a TON of scope for that $300...

 

 

The horseshoe is .. appropriately sized? Its point is to aid with close in fast aiming and reflect some of the illumination in low light in absence of a very bright illumination.  At close range it provides enough information for quick aiming, at longer distances you are focusing on the inner crosshairs so it isn't really involved. Do I want it? In a low illumination scope, absolutely. In bright scope, not so much.

 

It is slower then a red dot, for two reasons. First the scope doesn't have a bright as the sun red dot to draw your eye, some of the higher end scopes come close. Secondly, the eye box is not as forgiving as a nearly parallax free reddot or the bigger scopes.  That said, with practice and a solid cheek weld, it can probably be faster then most people think, specially in good light conditions.

 

No idea on battery. Based on the type of scope it is, I'd say 100-200h. The good news is if the battery goes out you still have the reticle.  On scopes like that one I hardly ever bother with illumination unless it is a dark house or something

[Vlad G 345]

  Another point, from all the reviews is that you are getting a TON of scope for that $300...

 

No doubt.