2nd Thoughts -- Vortex Viper PST?

Discussion in 'Long Range Hunting & Shooting' started by Brydawg512, Apr 17, 2019.


Help Support Long Range Hunting by donating:


  1. BergerBoy

    BergerBoy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    282
    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2014
    I will upset MANY people with this comment but I have had 2 PST gen 1s and both were GARBAGE!!! The PSTs are now the HSTs. IMO the gen2 is a MUCH better scope and I would sell that gen1 and get the gen2. My tracking was bad. My zero was always moving-if I dialed up for like a 800 yard shot when i dialed back to zero it was not even close (8 inches off at 100 meters). I also had the gen2 Razor 4.5-27 for a couple of years. Good scope but if I spent that much why not spend a little more and buy NF, USO, or other top PROVEN brand? I sold it and bought another NF. Vortex has some great reticles and some of the greatest CS and nice people IMO but there is something to be said about setting behind a scope that is unquestionably going to preform. JMO
     
  2. Litehiker

    Litehiker Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,785
    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2012
    If I wanted a high magnification scope I'd get the Bushnell XRS 4.5 - 30 X 50. ED glass and excellent turrets.

    For lower magnification theVortex scopes are nice but so are the other Bushnell Elite scopes and some European scopes.

    Eric B.
     
  3. pcmacd

    pcmacd Member

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2016
    I had an early Springfield ~4.5-15 with a large objective. Probably their first scope.

    Terrible parallax @100 yards. This was my first scoped rifle and it took me a while to figure.

    Called Springfield.... it's parallax free at 110 yards? My range was 100?

    I badgered them until they sent me an adjustable focus model.
     
  4. Csafisher

    Csafisher Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    193
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    My hst tracks great. Glass sucks but it tracks well and it is reliable
     
  5. floyd kittrell

    floyd kittrell Active Member

    Messages:
    43
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Euro-Optics has a bunch of Nightforce demos deeply discounted right now , good deal .
     
  6. MudRunner2005

    MudRunner2005 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,295
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    No, I don't "internet". I don't use anti-social media, or any of that crap. Just a couple of forums based on subjects i'm interested in, like guns and cars.
     
  7. Tensilon

    Tensilon Member

    Messages:
    15
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2010
    Hey, I recently got an FFP vortex scope. Haven't had a chance to work it over yet. I set up and work over my own rifles for long range shooting...mainly used on paper but ready to go for hunting. I reload my own ammo for precision and when I say I work the rifles over I mean that I bed them, pillar them, float them, lap the barrels and often the rings, bed the ring mounts, and square up the recoil lugs. Most generally anything that can be done to increase consistent behavior from the rifle. Same thing goes for the ammo. I have quite a few calibers that I have done this for and a couple more that I am working on now including 300 WM, 6.5 mm Creedmoor, 7 mm Rem Mag, 270 Win, 243 Win, and a 25-06. I have quite a few Bushnell Elite tactical scopes...at least 2 that are 4.5 x 30 x50 SFP. I go through each scope that I put on using the tall ladder test and the box test to see if they return if to POA. What I have found is that while a scope may indeed track very well there can be considerable variation as to the distance that each scope moves with each click. I prefer 1/4 moa clicks for my scopes. When they say 1/4 moa clicks I find that often they do not measure in at exactly 0.250 moa per click and if I assume that 0.250 is what the click is without checking it on the ladder test and figuring out exactly what the measurement is then I find that using my ballistics programs will give me dope that is off especially at distance. For example, for one of my Elites the click value is consistent at 0.263 per click. This works out to 1.052 inches for 4 clicks at 100 yards. Well, we all know that 1 moa is 1.047 inches at 100 yards. It may seem like splitting hairs but at range this little bit of difference adds up therefore I always use the correction element in the ballistics programs to correct the click value to exactly what I determined it to be, to the best of my ability, the actual click value for each scope. I have had good luck with this. I have also found that if you find a 1/4 click moa scope that actually measures exactly 0.250 inches per click then that is somewhat of a rarity. So, shoot the box for sure but then shoot the ladder to determine what the actual click value is for each of your particular scopes and for each particular rifle setup that you are going to use it on. Like I said, this seems to work for me pretty well either that or I have just been pretty lucky through the years. The equipment available now has gotten so much better than it used to be years ago. I guess you kinda have to like to fiddle around quite a bit to do these things, but isn't that kind of what we all rather enjoy doing with our rifle setups anyway;) The older I get the more I find I guess I agree with the old Townsend Whelen axiom that says "Only accurate rifles are interesting".
    FWIW
    Tens
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2019