Horus Vision, anyone like them???

Discussion in 'Long Range Scopes and Other Optics' started by derrickmanx1, Jan 10, 2010.

  1. derrickmanx1

    derrickmanx1 Member

    Messages:
    21
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    I've been hearing about these for a few years. Just wondering if anyone like the horus vision line of optic. I don't wat to spend $1000-1500 to see one for the first time. Are they clear? How do they rate against mark 4 or nightforce?
     
  2. theodore

    theodore Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    293
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    I have a 4-16x Raptor model that was on sale last year for $850 directly from the companies head quarter.

    Love it due to easy measuring, quick second shot placement, and is nice to have when the battery powered rangefinder doesn't work.

    The hawk optic is not designed for beyond 600 yards. Optic doesn't adjust so distant places are blurry. Raptor and Falcon models both easily go up to 2000 yards. Nice to have H25 reticle and good range of elevation adjustment.

    I often use the turret only for long range shot but the reticle is just as effective and is perfect for quick shots. The turret is also easy to take off (one screw to loosen) for resetting to zero purpose, unlike leupold you need a special allen wrench (three screws to loosen) to reset zero due to condition changes.

    As for comparison? All I can say is I been able to make shots in low light situation and the horizon hasn't stopped me yet. Nightforce is probably obviously a better scope. Not sure about leupold.

    Another thing is all of Horus Vision scopes focal plane is not an issue cause it is in the front. Meaning you can shoot at any power if using reticle hold-over. Night force front focal scopes are over $2,200 and Leupold front focal scopes are over $1500.

    Man this lengthy!
     

  3. theodore

    theodore Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    293
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Don't get me wrong about the hawk model that I say it only goes to 600 yards, it is capable of shooting over 1000 yards accurately. Under 600 yards, the glass is good.
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2010
  4. RockZ

    RockZ Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    899
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    I used a Hawk on my 204 ruger for a prairie dog hunt.
    It was awesome and the reticle makes it easy to shoot quickly at various ranges
    Most shots were between 200 and 400yds. It was fast and easy to go to long and short range using the reticle. 1 shot kills were the norm.
    The glass is clear and bright.
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2010
  5. Tikkamike

    Tikkamike Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,361
    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2009
    My dad has one on his McMillan 50 BMG that goes out to 2400 or 2500 yards and it seems clear as any of my leupold, or zeiss scopes even my Leica Binos.... Hard to beat a Leupold IMO I have never seen anything clearer. just equal to.. I have 3000 dollar Binos and they seem no more clear than my Leupold.. But yeah Horus Vision seems good from my limited experience

    Mikegun)
     
  6. theodore

    theodore Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    293
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    With 1.5 year of owning the raptor, Bottom line, the two huge weaknesses are not able to hold the zero reliably and it is not waterproof. Had to replace it within the one year warranty due to water filling up in it. It happened on the very first day of snow in the sierras, maybe 25 degrees at its coldest during night time. FRUSTRATING!

    The nikon prostaff for under $200 is a more water proof than this dang raptor! Leupold crushes, I mean crushes the raptor for waterproof and reliablity of turret.
     
  7. LouBoyd

    LouBoyd Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    770
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    I have a Horus Falcon with the H37 illuminated reticle. I like the concept and "feel" of the mil grid reticle with 0.2 milli-radian subdivisions. It gives the precision of shooting using target knobs but without the wasted time or potential errors of knob twisting and click counting. So far I have no complaints with the ruggedness of the scope, though it is heavy at two pounds. It's optical quality is satisfactory. I'd prefer to have the same reticle (the Horus H37) in a lightweight, rugged, and simple 16x40 scope similar to a Leupold Mk 4 M1. I wouldn't object to a lower price than either of them. I don't find the illuminated reticle to be of any use, though it would be if a Horus style mil grid reticle was installed in a 10x night vision scope with a Gen III image intensifier. That might be a bit expensive. Horus reticles are available in US Optics scopes, but I wouldn't spend that kind of money and not get night vision capability too.

    Additional things I like about the Horus Falcon, mostly because it has a mil grid reticle, is that it's a scope that can be easily moved between rifles. I can record the "zero" setting for each rifle, then move the scope which is on quick release Picatinny mounts. That way the windage/elevation knobs are only changed when moving the scope, or to re-zero on a particular rifle while the mil grid remains correct for any rifle. It's possible to do that for a conventional target knob scope but it's more tedious. The grid reticle also makes zeroing a rifle very simple since it can measure the error of a shot precisely in both axes, then just click in both offsets. It makes "one shot" zeroing nearly as easy as with the dual reticle Shepherd scopes. Gimmicks? maybe, but the grid aiming certainly is not a gimmick. It's not a "ballistic compensated reticle". All ballistic calculations still have to be done external to the scope. But for the same reason it works with any bullet, velocity, and atmosphere.

    The grid reticle can be used for range finding just like a a mil-dot reticle can, but it has the same limitations for the precision of the distance measurements. I use a laser range finder instead. The Horus scope does not provide any significant advantage or disadvantage compared to other scopes for estimating crosswinds or wind deflection, but it does allow fast and precise windage offsets.

    I'm of the opinion the mil grid reticle is a good concept at variable ranges where external range finders and wind instruments with lookup tables or computers are necessary. It's not for target shooting at fixed distances or for short range hunting. If it holds together I'll have no regrets from having spent $1600. Time will tell.
     
  8. theodore

    theodore Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    293
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    The falcon is nearly twice more expensive than the raptor. So I'm betting that the falcon could probably smash the raptor to pieces for that much price difference.

    I still continue to use the raptor due it undeniable convenience of its ffp and H25 reticle, the replacement scope lost its zero by 1.9 mil within the first 50 rounds out of a 243 win pushing 105VLD over 3000fps. It was probably the rough road fault yet the first scope took more abuse and didn't lose its zero. For now the replacement scope seems to be tracking fine for now.

    But I gotta tell ya this scope is so much fun to play with in heavy unstable wind. Makes the 800 yard shot so much more difficult than a 1200 yard shot on a calm day.
     
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2010