Burris Verocity or Viper HS
- Thread starter pyscodog
- Start date
Originally Posted By: liliysdadBased on my experience with similar scopes (Burris XTR II, Vortex HS-T and PST)....the Burris wins this one hands down. There is nothing the Vortex does that the Burris does not do better.
Plus 1 all day. The OP comparison is not fair to the Vortex.
Plus 1 all day. The OP comparison is not fair to the Vortex.
sandy hicks
New member
Burris for me.
There was a fella at the range the other day that had a vortex gen 2 razor blah blah blah. I asked if I could look through it, he said sure shoot a few rounds... So I did, the rifle was a nice custom 6.5 creed. I sat down, snugged it up and about .... Myself. I said "what did I mess up?" He sat down and said nothing man, it's good to go. I asked what he paid for it. He said he had 2 of them at about $2K each. These were his first high end scopes. I invited him over to look through a $750 mark 4 target model, and he almost cried. I felt bad for him honestly. I had wanted a vortex razor, and that day made me laugh my way out of it.... Crazy. That scope was a joke at that price. Hopefully there's something wrong with it.
I'm sure you guys will want me to elaborate. It had so much mirage at 18x that I dialed down to 6X immediately with no improvement. It lacked the sharpness you look for in a high end optic. I used to own a SN3 that would almost make me dizzy it was so clear. You could see the grain in a paper target (got divorced, sold it, still sad.). I know that anymore, Mark 4s are just another scope, but they hold their own for hunting and steel/paper shooting for me, but I was quite surprised by this vortex of his. A guy I hunt with a couple times a year has a PST. It's fairly clear, but I haven't ever seen its image in the heat.
Anyway, not hating on them, but stating what I saw for certain. At the very least, of that scope is defective, it shouldn't have made its way out the door with that sort of price tag.
I'm sure you guys will want me to elaborate. It had so much mirage at 18x that I dialed down to 6X immediately with no improvement. It lacked the sharpness you look for in a high end optic. I used to own a SN3 that would almost make me dizzy it was so clear. You could see the grain in a paper target (got divorced, sold it, still sad.). I know that anymore, Mark 4s are just another scope, but they hold their own for hunting and steel/paper shooting for me, but I was quite surprised by this vortex of his. A guy I hunt with a couple times a year has a PST. It's fairly clear, but I haven't ever seen its image in the heat.
Anyway, not hating on them, but stating what I saw for certain. At the very least, of that scope is defective, it shouldn't have made its way out the door with that sort of price tag.
Last edited:
xphunter
Active member
On the Razor HD was the eyepiece (ocular, not the side focus) focused for your eyes or did you leave it the way the owner had it adjusted?
The Razor HD Gen 2's have great glass.
I guess lemons do slip in, but this is surprising.
Of the two in the OP's question = Burris Veracity
The Razor HD Gen 2's have great glass.
I guess lemons do slip in, but this is surprising.
Of the two in the OP's question = Burris Veracity
Originally Posted By: CZ527There was a fella at the range the other day that had a vortex gen 2 razor blah blah blah. I asked if I could look through it, he said sure shoot a few rounds... So I did, the rifle was a nice custom 6.5 creed. I sat down, snugged it up and about .... Myself. I said "what did I mess up?" He sat down and said nothing man, it's good to go. I asked what he paid for it. He said he had 2 of them at about $2K each. These were his first high end scopes. I invited him over to look through a $750 mark 4 target model, and he almost cried. I felt bad for him honestly. I had wanted a vortex razor, and that day made me laugh my way out of it.... Crazy. That scope was a joke at that price. Hopefully there's something wrong with it.
Yeah I always heard they were junk.
Yeah I always heard they were junk.
Originally Posted By: xphunterOn the Razor HD was the eyepiece (ocular, not the side focus) focused for your eyes or did you leave it the way the owner had it adjusted?
The Razor HD Gen 2's have great glass.
I guess lemons do slip in, but this is surprising.
Of the two in the OP's question = Burris Veracity
Nope...it must have been junk. That's the only explanation...
The Razor HD Gen 2's have great glass.
I guess lemons do slip in, but this is surprising.
Of the two in the OP's question = Burris Veracity
Nope...it must have been junk. That's the only explanation...
Originally Posted By: pahntr760Originally Posted By: xphunterOn the Razor HD was the eyepiece (ocular, not the side focus) focused for your eyes or did you leave it the way the owner had it adjusted?
The Razor HD Gen 2's have great glass.
I guess lemons do slip in, but this is surprising.
Of the two in the OP's question = Burris Veracity
Nope...it must have been junk. That's the only explanation...
I don't know what you guys are poking at here. I tried the scope out, it sucked, and I made sure the owner confirmed. Why would I make this up?
The Razor HD Gen 2's have great glass.
I guess lemons do slip in, but this is surprising.
Of the two in the OP's question = Burris Veracity
Nope...it must have been junk. That's the only explanation...
I don't know what you guys are poking at here. I tried the scope out, it sucked, and I made sure the owner confirmed. Why would I make this up?
Originally Posted By: CZ527There was a fella at the range the other day that had a vortex gen 2 razor blah blah blah. I asked if I could look through it, he said sure shoot a few rounds... So I did, the rifle was a nice custom 6.5 creed. I sat down, snugged it up and about .... Myself. I said "what did I mess up?" He sat down and said nothing man, it's good to go. I asked what he paid for it. He said he had 2 of them at about $2K each. These were his first high end scopes. I invited him over to look through a $750 mark 4 target model, and he almost cried. I felt bad for him honestly. I had wanted a vortex razor, and that day made me laugh my way out of it.... Crazy. That scope was a joke at that price. Hopefully there's something wrong with it.
I'm sure you guys will want me to elaborate. It had so much mirage at 18x that I dialed down to 6X immediately with no improvement. It lacked the sharpness you look for in a high end optic. I used to own a SN3 that would almost make me dizzy it was so clear. You could see the grain in a paper target (got divorced, sold it, still sad.). I know that anymore, Mark 4s are just another scope, but they hold their own for hunting and steel/paper shooting for me, but I was quite surprised by this vortex of his. A guy I hunt with a couple times a year has a PST. It's fairly clear, but I haven't ever seen its image in the heat.
Anyway, not hating on them, but stating what I saw for certain. At the very least, of that scope is defective, it shouldn't have made its way out the door with that sort of price tag.
Interesting perspective. Scope "clarity" is so subjective I don't pay much attention to it, generally. I will say this, however, I know a gentleman that is sponsored by Burris optics and he still states the Gen II Razor is hands down better glass clarity. That's stating something. I also have to think that scope company's put their best foot forward in their top-tier scopes. R&D costs more to get the perfect glass, scientifically speaking, so I believe it stands to reason they put better glass in their higher-end optics. Sounds like you looked through some that somehow made it past QA when they shouldn't hsve but this happens with all companies. It's too bad Vortex didn't have a better warranty to fix this issue
I'm sure you guys will want me to elaborate. It had so much mirage at 18x that I dialed down to 6X immediately with no improvement. It lacked the sharpness you look for in a high end optic. I used to own a SN3 that would almost make me dizzy it was so clear. You could see the grain in a paper target (got divorced, sold it, still sad.). I know that anymore, Mark 4s are just another scope, but they hold their own for hunting and steel/paper shooting for me, but I was quite surprised by this vortex of his. A guy I hunt with a couple times a year has a PST. It's fairly clear, but I haven't ever seen its image in the heat.
Anyway, not hating on them, but stating what I saw for certain. At the very least, of that scope is defective, it shouldn't have made its way out the door with that sort of price tag.
Interesting perspective. Scope "clarity" is so subjective I don't pay much attention to it, generally. I will say this, however, I know a gentleman that is sponsored by Burris optics and he still states the Gen II Razor is hands down better glass clarity. That's stating something. I also have to think that scope company's put their best foot forward in their top-tier scopes. R&D costs more to get the perfect glass, scientifically speaking, so I believe it stands to reason they put better glass in their higher-end optics. Sounds like you looked through some that somehow made it past QA when they shouldn't hsve but this happens with all companies. It's too bad Vortex didn't have a better warranty to fix this issue
Last edited:
I have an XTR II...and I have no issue with the fact that the Razor, Gen 1 or II, is a better scope, in just about every way. Its not that the XTR is bad, its just not in the same class, and the cost reflects that.
While glass clarity is a somewhat subjective issue, its not completely so. Within a range of competitive optics, sure. When comparing scopes of completely different categories and price points, some things just are. One might argue over minutia between a S&B, Leupold Mark 8, and Hensoldt, but no one will logically state a Barska anything has the same caliber of glass as a PST, which will have poorer optics than a Mark 6...
In this same vein, I find it hard to believe that a Mark 4 anything is being compared to a Gen 2 Razor. I like Leupold glass just fine, but like above, they simply dont exist on the same plane.
While glass clarity is a somewhat subjective issue, its not completely so. Within a range of competitive optics, sure. When comparing scopes of completely different categories and price points, some things just are. One might argue over minutia between a S&B, Leupold Mark 8, and Hensoldt, but no one will logically state a Barska anything has the same caliber of glass as a PST, which will have poorer optics than a Mark 6...
In this same vein, I find it hard to believe that a Mark 4 anything is being compared to a Gen 2 Razor. I like Leupold glass just fine, but like above, they simply dont exist on the same plane.
Last edited: