First hand with a VORTEX Viper PST 6-24x50??

[Jon A]

Originally Posted by Flybuster

My experience is still pretty limited with the scope. I have the second focal plane model. The turrents are excellent, so is the MOA reticle, I like all the features.

Is yours a 4-16 or 6-24?

[Flybuster]

Originally Posted by Jon A

Is yours a 4-16 or 6-24?

Hi Jon,

I have the 6-24x50 model.

I've had it mounted on a couple rifles so far, right now it's on my .308 Palma. At 600 yards it appeared to track through all my wind adjustments accurately and returned to zero.

I've let some guys who's opinions I respect, look through it for their thoughts on the glass quality. We've concluded that between my Vortex and the Sightron (which we all own) has the higher resolution and clarity. I bought the Vortex expecting this, knowing the great features would offset the slightly lesser glass. I'm not a glassoholic by any means, so I really dig this scope.

It looks and feels, solid and tough. The only thing that concerns me, or I can picture being a weak link in the future are the rubberized variable power ring. This may never have a problem, but I could just see the adhesion coming apart after years of use.

I haven't tried the zero stop feature yet, so I can't comment on this. Once it settles on a rifle then I will try it. From what I've read, I understand it doesn't come to a stop right on zero, but somewhere near zero, then you must eyeball it back to match your point blank zero. That is what I expect, hopefully someone here has tried it and can explain.

[Yotekiller]

I don't understand why people get so worked up over who has the best glass. If a scope has decent glass it is good enough for me. In binoculars that I look through for a long time trying to spot game I want the best glass I can afford to avoid eye fatigue. In a scope I am more concerned about accurate tracking, enough adjustment for the weapon I am mounting it on, reticle designed for the way I want to use it, side focus parallax, durability, warranty, and price. I don't have a PST scope, but I think the next one I buy will be a ffp 6-24x50 with moa reticle (lots of features I want at a great price). For me it would not be worth paying twice as much for a scope with better glass that wont help me shoot any more accurately than the cheaper scope. my 02

[Capt Academy]

I am also considering trying the PST 6-24-50. Tons of features for the price.

[Senderofan]

Originally Posted by Yotekiller

I don't understand why people get so worked up over who has the best glass. If a scope has decent glass it is good enough for me. In binoculars that I look through for a long time trying to spot game I want the best glass I can afford to avoid eye fatigue. In a scope I am more concerned about accurate tracking, enough adjustment for the weapon I am mounting it on, reticle designed for the way I want to use it, side focus parallax, durability, warranty, and price. I don't have a PST scope, but I think the next one I buy will be a ffp 6-24x50 with moa reticle (lots of features I want at a great price). For me it would not be worth paying twice as much for a scope with better glass that wont help me shoot any more accurately than the cheaper scope. my 02

I think you'll find better internals go hand in hand with better glass. Probably doesn't make a huge difference when shooting to a couple hundred yards...but when trying to reach out 800, 1000 yards and beyond....the weakness in the glass and shortcomings in the internals show themselves. You can really fee and see the difference in the turrets....better tactile feedback and repeatability.

I'm just thankful we have options...like the PST available to us. Can't always afford the $2000-$3000+ scopes. The PST offers a lot of features that much higher priced scopes do....at a price that's more attainable.

The more options a guy has...the better! IMHO.

Wayne