I have a chance to get an awesome deal on the Viper PST Gen 2 5-25x50 FFP. Any reason not to? I currently run an SWFA 16x42, which is fine but the Vortex would be a big upgrade in glass quality and magnification range.

I know Vortex has a reputation for having a good warranty and for folks having to use the warranty more often than necessary, but does anyone know if that has held up even on the gen 2 models? Has anyone tested how accurately they track?

I checked out the PST Gen 2 against the Burris XTR II 5-25 (Vortex had much, much better glass to my eyes). I also checked out the PST Gen 2 against the SWFA HD 5-20: glass was about the same, but the focus knob on the SWFA was incredibly hard to turn. Given the deal I'm possibly getting, the Vortex is considerably cheaper than both, so I don't see the down-side, but I know some folks on here who have actually used one of the PST Gen 2 might be able to chime in with real-world experiences.

I can't comment specifically on the gen 2, but I have the PST gen 1. It's a decent scope for the money. I contacted Vortex with an issue last week and they have been AWESOME to work with thus far. For what it's worth, the warranty and customer service seems to be as good as you hear it is.

Let me know what you think of the gen 2 if you get it. I am considering one with a EBR-2c reticle. I am between that and the Bushnell Tremor 3 / H59 scope.

I got to see the 3-15 version of the PST Gen 2 in person. Can't imagine better optics for the money. Haven't looked through the 5-25 in person yet. I did like the open center on the reticle more than I thought I would. I like it better than a solid crosshair, but not as much as a floating dot or small cross.

Does your PST Gen 1 track accurately? If you hold an elevation, take a shot, and then dial that same elevation, are the impacts in the same place?

Yes, I have had no issues with tracking. My only dislikes/issues (and the reason I sent it in) are:

1. The "eyebox" gets extremely tight when you get into the upper end of magnification. If shooting in a non-optimal position you really can't use it over about 16x.

2. The magnification ring is very tight and difficult to turn when mounted. Using a throw lever helps, but I don't think that should be a necessity.

Vortex received the scope this morning. I will update you on what they say and their service.

1. and 2. were common traits of the Gen I. Can't do anything about the eye box, but buy a different scope. Installing a cattail on the magnification ring corrects the difficulty in turning the magnification ring.

Upper end Bushnell is a much better scope. I've had an ERS 3.5-21X, with the G-2 reticle for over two years, and am still very happy with everything about it. I put the glass clarity of that Bushnell on par with my NF ATACR.

Thanks Jason. Are there any Bushnell scopes that compare in the sub-$1000 range? Looks like the ERS is around $1500, which is unfortunately too high for me. Price I might be able to get the Viper PST Gen 2 for is comfortably under $1k.

ETA: the 3.5-21 is an ERS model. They make a sub-$1000 LRS model that's 6-24 mag. Are those comparable glass and feature-wise?

IMO, for the $1300-$1400 price tag of this unit, there are better scopes available. I like the Vortex scopes, but they do have some draw backs. And I don't buy a scope based on glass quality.

If you look on Snipers Hide, in the Optics for sale section, you can find a used ERS around $1100-ish. Gotta keep you eyes peeled, though. I can't comment on the less expensive Bushnells.

Money spent on a good scope is never wasted.

I don't disagree. I just don't have the money to spend when we hit 4-digit price ranges. After some research, it does seem like there are legitimate differences between ERS and LRS units, even though both get good reviews.

The PST Gen II would be comfortably under $1k.

If it tracks poorly, that would be a deal-breaker for sure. But I don't abuse my scopes and I don't shoot competitively, so it would just be a "want" upgrade, not a need.

Looks like my SWFA 16x42 may have some tracking issues, so I was just debating on making an upgrade when it gets fixed and selling it when I get it back. But I might just hold onto it if the Vortex isn't worth the $. My SWFA has very good glass for $300, and I don't necessarily need more or less than 16x magnification. It's just right for what I do. But the PST Gen II I looked at was incredibly clear in comparison to my SWFA 16x42, much better than the Burris XTR II, and on par with the SWFA HD 5-20 that costs $600 more, so I was just entertaining the idea because of the discount opportunity. I like the new reticle, illumination, and the zero stop turrets a lot also. But if there are other options in the sub-$1000 range that are better or if it just isn't worth it to spend $800-$900 because the $1500 scopes really are that much better, then I'll hold off.

I've looked at a lot of scopes lately and ended up getting a 3x15

The 5x25 is brighter

The pst 2 is a winner imo under a 1000

A gen 1 pst looks like a bsa compared to a pst 2

Remember I said $1100-ish for a used ERS?

$200 more gets you into way more scope.

What do you think is better about the ERS other than glass quality?

Does Bushnell warranty cover used scopes?

Have you used a Gen 2 or mostly comparing the ERS to Gen 1? Supposedly there are a number of significant upgrades.

BIL - my experience was the same. Only got to look through a Gen 1 once, but I wasn't impressed at all. The Gen 2 looked really, really awesome in comparison.

It also has the Gen 1 Razor zero stop elevation turret, has an upgraded reticle from the Gen 1, and better illumination. The biggest issues are unknown Vortex QC, limited elevation travel, and tracking accuracy.

•No eye box complaint.
•No magnification ring complaint.
•Locking turrets.
•Better reticle.
•Yes, better glass.
•Bushnell's warranty is for the scope, period. No receipt or card required. I would not suggest a used scope if that were not the case.
•I am comparing to a Gen I. I've handled the turrets on a Gen II, and like the Gen I, they are way too easy to turn.
•The Gen I, I had, I could not use 24X, because clarity went to crap, so I turned it down.
•Everyone touts Vortex's warranty, and they're right, they are great to work with. AND there's plenty of Vortex owners that have had to use it. I've owned two Vortex optics, and have sent both of them in for repair. I sent my Bushy in for examination, and all it needed was dust removal from the turret. I've never sent in my SS 5-20X, and it's been punished, with hard use. When I was weighing the Vortex Razor AMG, against the Night force ATACR F-1, what drove it home was NF's reputation for toughness and reliability. I couldn't care less about a great warranty in the middle of no where on a hunt, or in the middle of a rifle match out to 1200 yards. I want no break-down in the first place.

You're worrying about another 20% cost. My recommendation to you is to keep saving, and buy what WILL work, work better, and not be a stop gap measure. Been there, done that, lost money, and bought what I should have in the first place.

Bushnell LRS

Played around with my 5-25 this morning trying to take a pick using my iPhone.

I had a hard time holding the camera and trying to focus so the pic doesn't do it justice Here it is anyway. Feeder is 250 yards away at 25X power.

Interesting take. Thanks for the thoughtful response - I value your opinion more than most others for sure. I don't want to come off like I already had my mind made up on the Vortex, but I'm still not sure that I've seen anything that changes my mind from thinking that the Vortex is a really good option for me that's cheaper new than the Bushnell used. If I had read that they were just horribly unreliable or the tracking was regularly inaccurate, those would be reasons to me to look at something else. When you said to buy something that isn't a stop gap measure, that's what I thought I was buying with the Viper. It's an upgrade price, feature, and glass-wise to the SWFA 3-15, Athlon scopes, etc. You can always talk yourself into more expensive stuff. Guys shooting with $2k+ scopes probably see the Bushnell as a "stop-gap". It's all relative.

Regarding the specifics:

The ERS turrets are not an upgrade to me. I tried the Viper PST Gen 2 turrets in store and liked them a lot. Having to raise and lower the Bushnell turrets is a disadvantage for my uses. 99.9% of my shooting is from a bench. The odds of me knocking one inadvertently are basically zero.

Can't speak to glass quality. The Viper PST Gen 2 glass was really, really impressive. Haven't looked through the ERS or LRS.

On the reticle, I looked at the ERS reticle and wasn't very fond of the hold lines on the bottom. I liked the dots on the bottom of the Vortex reticle much better (with the exception of the mil numbering taking up so much space where the dots should be on the right side).

The eye box on the Gen 2 is supposedly better than Gen 1. I don't know if the Bushnell eye box is significantly better or just a marginal improvement. I don't know of a mag ring complaint, but I've read that the mag ring on the Gen 2 is buttery smooth, which matches up with impression of the 3-15 I got to hold in store.

Regarding you not being able to use the Gen 1 over 20x, I have seen that complaint elsewhere too. I need to check out a Gen 2 5-25 at max magnification before saying whether it's improved here, but reviews online seem to indicate it is improved in this area.

If the Vortex is really not a great option, I'm thinking I'll probably stick with my 16x42 and get the tracking error fixed. I just don't think there's any way for me to justify $1k+ for a scope, and nothing cheaper than the Viper PST Gen 2 is enough of an upgrade to justify any extra money. The only other options would be to consider the SWFA 3-15 FFP or the Athlon lineup. But the only reason I was really considering an upgrade to the 16x42 was because of the deal I could get on the Viper PST Gen 2.

Thanks again for the response.

Thanks!

Interesting thread. I had some interest in the PST 2 as well. I have 2 PST first gen but I bought them both at discounts because the new models were coming out and both are 2.5-10. I don't have anything over 10X. I am considering the SWFA 5-20 HD on a Black Friday sale. I think last year the non illuminated version went on sale for $1049. I believe it has 30 Mil of total elevation compared to 20 Mil for the PST gen 2. My other consideration would be the often recommended Burris XTR II.

I compared all 3. Here were my opinions:

Glass: Vortex > tiny difference > SWFA < huge difference > Burris
Reticle: Burris > tiny difference > Vortex < medium difference > SWFA
Turrets: Burrs > tiny difference > Vortex < big difference > SWFA
Price: Vortex > Burris > SWFA
Perceived quality based on internet opinion: SWFA > Burris > Vortex

I just couldn't find any reason not to get the Vortex unless the perceived quality issues are real.

That being said, at $1049, the SWFA HD would seem to be a heck of a scope for the money if the really stiff side focus knob was specific to the display model or if it was preferable to people like Jason who don't want it to get bumped because they use their scopes out in the field more than on a bench.

When I contacted Vortex it was originally to complain about the eyebox and magnification ring, as well as inquire about swapping the EBR1 reticle for the EBR2 reticle. I figured that the complaints were pretty standard as I have seen them mentioned online time and time again. However, the representative seemed like this was not normal and encouraged me to send it in. I figured I can't continue complaining if I don't let them have a look at it. I don't think there is anything they can do, but we will see.

I have shot side by side my PST and my cousin's 30mm Bushnell, 34mm Bushnell HDMR, and NF ATACR. All of these seem to be way more of a scope than the Gen I PST. Of course, they are 50% if not 100% more in cost.

I am in agreement with FiremanJG. The next scope I buy will be the next level (probably Bushnell HDMR) as the PST just doesn't do everything I want it to. I thought it would when I was getting started in this game, but even with my limited experience, it just doesn't.

Thanks for your insight. I would be interested to know if you had the same thoughts after using the Gen 2. Reports from everyone are that the Gen 2 is much closer in performance to the Gen 1 Razor (which receives nearly universal praise) than the Gen 1 PST (which suffers from many of the complaints you and Jason mention).

Regardless, I'll check out the ERS before I make a decision. I'm not going to blatantly ignore input from you guys. One other question though - what are your uses? I shoot steel targets 300-400 regularly at the range, out to 800 max right now. I don't hunt, don't shoot competitively, and really just wanted a glass upgrade from my $300 SWFA fixed power scope (which I feel is perfectly adequate for my uses already). If the PST Gen 2 is as much of an upgrade from the Gen 1 as reviews online indicate it is, would you still feel compelled to spend 50%-100% more if those were your uses?

Put this another way - I'm into photography and we constantly get amateurs asking for advice on mid-level gear and then we constantly get pros suggesting that mid-level gear is junk. I use mid-level photography gear (taking around 5,000-10,000 photos a year) and I get great results for very reasonable prices. I'm sure it wouldn't hold up to the constant beating that a pro puts on it, but it's the perfect blend of performance and price for me. I don't think my results or my enjoyment of the hobby would change at all if I had spent twice the money on the camera and lenses. So I'm just trying to look at scopes the same way - I want to buy the right gear for my skills/uses/budget.

My use case is not too different from yours. I mainly like to hit steel. My goal is to learn to shoot at least 1000 yards with my equipment, my dope, my ammo - and be proficient at it in all conditions. I currently do not compete but would eventually like to try some PRS type matches. I just think it would be a fun way to spend a Saturday. I just love to shoot.

A couple of years ago when I started down this path I bought a Savage .308 that was on sale and the best scope I could afford at the time (after saving up) which was the PST. It was BY FAR the best scope I had ever owned. Now, after a few thousand rounds, lots of hours, and a couple of rifles later - I want more. I want a 34mm tube, a tree type reticle, and better glass. For what you describe (and the deal you can get on the Gen II) it may suit your needs just fine. You can always upgrade later.

For what it is worth, I also run an SWFA 16x on another rifle and it does suit my needs fine for that rifle. When it no longer does, I plan to move it to my .22 rifle.

Thanks!

I'll look at the ERS and LRS before I make a decision. But at this point, I've gone from leaning heavily towards the Vortex to leaning slightly towards just keeping my 16x42 and having the tracking error corrected. If anything, I might just "upgrade" to an Athlon Helos and call it a day. I just can't see myself buying a $1k+ scope for what I do. My wife definitely can't see that happening.

I understand your parallel. Remember, much of the expense in scopes of this type is true tracking. On a camera, your adjusting zoom, and focus, while using very clear glass (hopefully). On a scope of this type, you're adjusting zoom, focus, using clear glass, and adjusting point of impact corrections. Those proper POI corrections come at a price. The functionality, repeatability, and "true-ness" of a turret is a big deal

Yeah, that makes sense. I can certainly see from what you guys are saying how it is an extra factor that can have a major impact on price. I just need to go look at the Bushnells in person. I will say that if the tracking on the Vortex is suspect, then that's an automatic deal-breaker. But I haven't heard anyone say that so far.

I saw an SWFA HD 5-20 non-illuminated that just went for $820 on sniper's hide. That would have been a heck of a deal!

Is the focus knob on your SWFA HD really stiff? I could hardly turn it on the one in store, but it might be easier when it's mounted to a rifle.

I would pony up for a used or new gen 1 razor before the pst.

Focus knob on my SS is not stiff. But it's like a 10 year old saddle, that's been ridden every day. It's well "broke in".

You better jump on that SS for $820, That's a great price for such a useful scope. It might not be the new flavor for 2017, but it's still a very good scope to have. Though, I've got a couple other great scopes, I'll always have a job for my SS 5-20.

The PST Gen 2? Have you seen one in person or read the reviews on it?

Unfortunately that one sold a couple weeks ago. I just found the listing and realized how cheap it had sold for. Thought that was a screaming deal.

Yes and I wasn't impressed.

Interesting. That's not in line with 95%+ of the other reviews I've read online.

It's a step above the gen 1 but at it's typical price point of 1k I'd opt for others. The burris xtr 2 is better imo and better still at typically the 1300 (used) area is the gen 1 razor.

The glass on the Burris looked worse than my $300 SWFA to my eyes. I haven't checked a gen 1 razor.

You should get the PST if that is what you want. Vortex has an excellent warranty should run in to problems. The gen 2 is too new for anyone to give opinions on long term durability. JMHO.

You're right about durability.

I'm not saying I'm set on the PST G2, although it was some amazing clarity for the $. I'm going to go look at all of them again. Might get the PST or I might just keep what I have or I might find something else I love and keep an eye out for a used one. Lots of good input on this thread though.

You really think the Burris is worse than the SWFA fixed? I've heard a lot of good things about the Burris.

It was to me. That being said, I've seen sample variation on the SWFA fixed power. My first copy was pretty good, my second copy was not good at all. This last one I'm using now has been the best of the bunch optically. Not perfect, but really impressive for $300.

It could have been a sample variation issue on the Burris, or it could have just been that my eyes didn't like it, but I just couldn't get a good, clear image at 25x. It was better down at 15x (roughly on par with my 16x42), but that's not why I would be looking at that scope. The SWFA HD and Viper PST Gen 2 were both good, clear scopes, although I will give a slight edge to the PST Gen 2 for my eyes. But either could do the job equally well from an optical standpoint.

It's been a while since I have looked through a ers, but I did a side by side with a dmr 1 and the gen2 pst glass is considerably better! Tracking with mine has been fine on my 22 but I only shoot out to 100 yards with it most of the time. I gave 799 new for mine 3-15 ffp mrad.

Thanks. That's a good price on the 3-15 FFP.

Might take a look at the Bushnell Elite Tactical LRS. On the used side, it's quite a bit cheaper than ERS or SWFA HD.

Anyone try the Sig Sauer Tango 4 6-24x50? Their website leaves a lot to be desired. Very little info on the reticles at all.

I got my PST back from Vortex late last week. I have yet to mount it, but I believe that the magnification ring tightness is significantly better and that the eye relief may be. I won't know for sure until I get it mounted this week.

They also fixed a couple of issues I was not aware of, one of which was a canted reticle. I now have an excuse for my poor shooting (in the past of course).

I will say that Vortex did a tremendous job. I shipped the scope off on a Friday and had it back in my possession the following Friday. Also in the box was a new battery for the illuminated reticle and a pretty awesome Vortex hat. I couldn't be happier with the experience.

Thanks for the post RCINTX. I'm hoping to be able to run by SWFA and compare Bushnell ERS/LRS, SWFA 3-15 non-HD & 5-20 HD, Sig Tango 4, Burris XTR II, and Vortex PST Gen 2. Customer service like that will help lean the decision towards Vortex for sure. That's really excellent.

There is a new sig tango 6 at rifle gear

I can find very little on the sig scopes. The tango 6 seems to be way out of my price range.

Keep in mind most glass will look similar under ideal conditions ie: bright sunny days with low mirage or indoor in a store. Outside in cloudy conditions or backgrounds that blend a target in with terrain the lesser glass stands out.

Good point dee. Went and checked a bunch of scopes in detail today.

Summary:

SWFA 5-20 HD - great glass and overall great scope, but insufficient reticle for the price point, focus knob was super stiff, and turrets were mushy
Bushnell ERS - great scope, high price
Bushnell LRS - terrible reticle and eye box
SWFA 3-15 - very good all-around scope and very, very good for the price, but glass quality considerably behind everything but the Burris and limited magnification range
Vortex PST - good glass, good reticle, good knobs, good eye box, good price
Burris XTR II - terrible glass - so bad that the rest is irrelevant

XTR II-Terrible glass... You need to check with your optometrist and figure that out before you post a review

In all fairness, I looked at only one sample, so it could have been a bad one. But it was worse than the SWFA 3-15, which was noticeably a notch below all of the others. The SWFA HD, B-ERS, B-LRS, and PST were all close enough to not make much of a difference, although I'd rank them SWFA HD, B-ERS, PST, B-LRS if I had to.

The XTR II has a reputation on SH for some folks loving the glass and others hating it. Not sure what about their coatings makes it so susceptible to large variation in personal opinion on the optics, but it does appear to be all over the map. I liked everything else about the XTR - the turrets, knobs, and reticle are all great. But much like the SWFA reticle is just unacceptable for a $1k+ scope regardless of how much I loved everything else, the optics on the Burris are unacceptable for a $1k+ scope regardless of how much I loved everything else.

Put it this way, if I were going to get into a gunfight with one of those you mentioned. The SS 5-20 HD would be number 1, and the ERS would be number 2.

Simply due to the fact that the SS of mine has been extremely reliable. The ERS had been reliable as well (with cleaner glass) but it simply has not fired, or spotted, as many rounds as the SS 5-20 HD.

I don't disagree. But prices aren't the same between them either.

Only reason this really came up was because I could get a great deal on the Vortex. I wasn't even looking to upgrade my 16x42 except that I didn't like that it didn't have a side focus knob and the lack of zoom was limiting. If I was going to upgrade, the Vortex was at the top end (or actually beyond) my budget. Anything more expensive was just a dream.

I 100% agree that in a firefight, I want the most reliable option and that's probably the SWFA (maybe it's the "Glock" of the scope world). Build quality on it was excellent, and the HD glass was really fantastic through the entire zoom range. But I just couldn't get over the idea of paying more money for that reticle and that focus knob compared to the Vortex.

The Bushnell ERS was way, way out of any realistic budget for me new, and I just couldn't wrap my head around paying $1k+ for a used scope. But it really was just an all-around excellent piece of equipment - no disagreement there.

Of the sub-$1k scopes, the PST was clearly the best. I don't disagree that the next level up has some nice upgrades that make it worth the jump. If I decide to move up down the road, I can probably sell the PST without taking much of a hit and make the upgrade. But for now, I really think it's more than I'll ever need.

Why?

You ever bought a used truck?

Except that scope has a great warranty, the truck doesn't. It's a sliding scale, $2k retail, equates to $1k+ used. It's actually a great deal, as some scopes sell for 80% of what they were retail.

Primarily, because I could get everything I wanted in a new scope for less than $1k. I do agree that the Bushnell at $1,100 used is probably a great deal. But according to my wife, my budget did not reach that level.

I get that. I really wanted a SWFA but the price point on the burris 4-20x made it clear. I would be glad to haul it out there and if jeremy comes you can look at the PST 2 side by side. Not sure if Jeremy was just being nice or it really was close. I liked them both honestly. I only peaked through Jasons bushnell stuff so I do not know what that is capable of. I know that ATACR is effing nice though. Really nice.

I saw some ATACRs for sale on SH, but they're crazy expensive even used. That's when you know it's good stuff.

Come on out to B Tactical some time. It's a fun place to shoot and I'd like to see your XTR II in comparison to the PST II. I've seen that you can find the XTR II on sale for really nice prices, especially the 4-20 version. And I can definitely see the appeal of it if you get a copy with good glass. Their reputation online is that Burris has good service, but it really isn't needed very often, which is great for peace of mind.

The couple xtr I've looked through were really nice for the price. Vortex has burned me on qc. When you have 4 gen 2 razors in a squad and none are of the same quality then there is a issue. Seems a large gamble of getting a good one or a mediocre one.

I hear the same thing about Taurus pistols, but between my dad, brother, and me, we have 4 of them that have never had a hiccup. Great for the price (or they used to be before they got way more expensive in the last 3-4 years). And undoubtedly, Vortex has a much better reputation than Taurus.

We'll see how it goes with the PST. Worst case is that I have some quality issues and have to use the universally renowned Vortex CS. I can live with that for the glass quality, features, and price.

Seems like the PST Gen 2, XTR II, etc. are in that upper echelon of scopes that are made in Phillipines, and the next level up ($1500+ street price) are all made in Japan. I'm sure there is some kind of quality difference there. If it ends up biting me, maybe I'll convince the wife to let me upgrade down the road. It isn't like I have to live with this scope forever if it's awful. But after taking it outside last night, I can tell you that the reticle, turrets, and glass quality are all an enormous upgrade from the 16x42 I've been using. So for now, I'll assume innocence until proven guilty and enjoy my early Christmas present.

Enjoy, I have been happy with my vortex and its not a gen II

You can lead a horse to water, dee....

No argument here. The water looked great. But my wife looked at the price of the water, yanked on the reins, and told me to stop looking at things I know I can't have...

Update:

I bought the PST Gen 2 and unfortunately, I ran into two small issues. One - the elevation turret was pretty stiff for about 1/4 of the travel during each turn (not horrible, but just enough to make me worry that something wasn't quite right inside). Two - adjusting the eyepiece for my eye ended up bottoming out the adjustment to one end. When I looked through the scope for more than 5-10 seconds against certain targets, the reticle would start getting blurry. Long story short - I returned it. Went to SWFA and sorted through the 5-20 HD non-illumated models they had on the shelf and found one with a smooth, not-too-stiff parallax knob, good/crisp turrets, and exceptional glass, and took the plunge.

I still think the PST Gen 2 is the best combination of features, glass quality, and price on the market. I don't think there's anything else even close to be honest (with the possible exception of a Burris XTR II if you get one with good glass). $1100 for a zero stop, really excellent illumination, FFP, good mag range, reliable tracking, good turrets, very good glass, not made in China, and a great reticle is just not going to be found anywhere else. That being said, the SWFA 5-20 HD is probably the best combination of build quality, reliable tracking, and glass quality anywhere south of $2k in my opinion. You just have to be willing to live with no zero stop, a mediocre reticle, and no illumination (or pay more for illumination that most folks don't seem to think very highly of).

Feel free to go ahead with the "I told you so" comments - I can take it. I still believe 100% that they're both great values and the PST Gen 2 is a really high quality scope with a ridiculous amount of features for the price, but the one I had just didn't work for me and I had to swap it out.

So why did t you just send it back to Vortex?

Honestly, I don't have a good answer for that. I'm sure they would've taken care of it. My real fear was that the reticle issue would be unresolve-able and I'd be stuck with the scope after having it too long to return it. Something about my eyes with that reticle just didn't seem to go together, and I couldn't pin it down to a reticle issue that wouldn't be fix-able even with a brand new scope or an ocular adjustment issue that was particular to that scope.

Either way, the glass on the SWFA 5-20 is very, very good and I really like it. But there's no doubt that you give up features and money for the extra build quality and glass quality.

I’m with redchevy, in that I have the ‘old’ model PST and like it just fine. My complaints, and I have a couple, are that the illumination is too bright even set at minimum, and the magnification ring is too tight. And, if I shot steel at distance, maybe the glass would disappoint me.

What I find much more interesting is that the Gen 1 PST was considered by the knowledgeable forum crowd to be pretty darn special, particularly at the $1k price point, until it became old news and no longer worthy of ownership. Consider that this is a hunting forum and not specifically a long range target forum (though surely the two can co-exist),and that just maybe a bit too much emphasis is placed on what a scope needs for 1000yard shooting, whereas a much less expensive scope that would be more than enough for hunting is deemed to be or hinted to be undesirable or marginal. That said, most of us old hands know the difference, but not everyone does.

603country

Vortex addressed several issues with the Gen 2 PST:

More forgiving eyebox
More useable illumination
Better optical clarity through entire zoom range
Added zero stop

Have yet to see anything Vortex track,repeat or hold zero...............

I TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I never get tired of being right.

LOVE schlepping Vortex Guys along,with a Toldjaso issued wellllllll in advance.

The hard part is scoring enough Bleach,to get the smell off one's mitts.................

Did you mean to say “fail to track...”?

Early reports on the Gen 2 are that tracking is very good.

I'm never not crystal clear..............

I do really love the SWFA 5-20, but I stilll think the lesson here is that the Vortex is an excellent scope - just not the right fit for my eyes.

Really? You're going with "excellent scope" after all the warnings, after all the other options you were given, after buying a brand spanking new one, and it gave trouble. You're gonna go with "excellent scope"?

Without hesitation.

My scope history:

SWFA 16x42 - tracked consistently but I only shot it to 300 yards so I can’t verify accuracy
SWFA 3-15 SFP - POI shifted when changing mag range
Sold my tactical stuff and got out of the centerfire game for awhile
Next SWFA 16x42 - major issues with optics and tracking (returned for another 16x42)
Next SWFA 16x42 - really good optics and consistent tracking, but inaccurate (up to .3 mils error at 6.5 mils from zero)
Vortex PST2 - slightly stiff knob and reticle blur
SWFA 5-20 - ?

They all have issues and they’re all compromises in one way or another (quality, features, price). The SWFA 5-20 compromises on features. The Vortex PST2 compromises in QC, but it’s not like it’s made in a China or anything. It’s a good scope - just didn’t work for me. Lots of folks use and love them. If I’m not mistaken, the Gen 1 is the #1 scope in PRS production division (or was). And then Gen 2 is an upgrade in every way. I’m just at the point that I want the most bulletproof scope I can get and I think that’s the SWFA HD.

If you’re looking new, I don’t know of another option that gives good turrets, good glass, great reticle, illumination, and zero stop at the $1k price point. Used is another story, but these will likely be the best value at their price point used as well once they’ve been out for awhile and prices settle down. Doesn’t mean that you can’t spend more and get more (like the ERS for example), but I don’t at all believe these are junk either.

Glass is easy.

6x MQ or 10x MQ and hold the Fluff.

Hint................

I thought about the 10x HD. I bet that's a nice scope.

This guy sounds like he knows what he is talking about.

I much prefer parallax adjustment,in a less obtrusive locale...because I'm a little hard on Riggin'.(grin)

6x MQ or 10x MQ and hold the Fluff.

Hint................

I can appreciate your scientific approach to your experience. But I would not label it as "excellent" if you immediately got rid of it, that just doesnt make sense. I can give the SS 5-20 HD excellent marks, in several sections, toughness, reliability, tracking, return to zero. Mine looks like crap now, because it has seen so much use.

I won't even give my 6 month old NF ATACR "excellent" marks just yet, because it just doesn't have the round count on it yet. I will bet on it, but I need more time with it to verify.

Variables,cain't hang with Fixed,whether Scopes,Spotters,camera lenses or anything else.

Hint..............

Well here you are wrong yet again, with a blanket statement.

I look forward to your departure, which won't be long now. That way so many of us don't have to go behind you and make corrections.

It's your Imagination,Pretend with it as you MUST.

Hint............

That's fair enough. Mainly what I meant was that it's an excellent value at the price point.

However, the SS 5-20 HD is really in a different league than anything I've used before. I'm looking forward to putting it through its paces.

If it behaves like the one I've had for 5 years, it will not let you down. Mine is the one I call "ole reliable", it's shot or spotted tens of thousands of rounds, and had never been sent in. I'll always have a place for it, I will never sell it.

Yes there's some slightly better glass, yes theres locking turrets out there, yes theres zero stop, yes there's reticles that people may prefer, but for what I spent on the SS 5-20X, it has been worth every penny. I did add a cattail to it, though.

Go buy some Zeiss lens cleaning wipes, and a lens pen. Keep the glass clean, and run it.

"Spotting" is TRULY the scope "test".

Oh my.

Hint.............

Well yeah, it does test how the glass does, amd how well it can focus through the mirage.

Who ties your shoes for you?

I enjoy your Imagination and Pretend,almost as much as you do...though for VERY different reasons,all of which escapes your "comprehension". Hint.

Feel free to "convince" yourself,that you could wear my boots.

Laughing!



Nothing wears out a scope,like looking through one!..................

Keep the blinders on, life is probably easier for you that way.

Glass clarity, by the way, is a function of any optic, including rifle scopes. There are some optics that, that is all their job is, to view. No reticle, no turrets, just image. In fact, a poll of hundreds of precision shooters showed glass clarity made an extremely close second to proper tracking. If you could open you mind just a bit, read more and write less, you could go see it at precisionrifleblog.com

Cute pic of a chainsaw, and about 5 pounds of clothing . I've cut down lots of trees. I've also cut open roofs, wearing 60 pounds of gear, breathing air from a tank on my back, in 100 degree weather, with fire coming out of the opening I'm making in the roof.

Wearing your boots would be an easy day off.

Nice try though.

I don't need to "read" about it...I simply USE it. Hint.

You've never even seen a tree....but it is HILARIOUS that you "think" you have. Bless your heart! One needs to have their first day ON,before they fret a day off and you've less than zero clue.

Hint.



Your copious Insecurities,are very WELL founded. Congratulations?!?..............

Evidently you habe forgotten what you've used. Because I am absolutely correct about optical clarity being a major feature in any rifle scope, despite your attempt at deflecting. You obviously lost yet again today. We've got a known troll, who is in ban camp right now for trolling, that was the resident expert at deflecting. You may give him a run for his money, fraud.

If you have the brain power to multiply, you can multiply 19 years and you will find how many days I've had "on".

"Never even seen a tree."

Now you've comfirmed to me that you are mentally unstable.

It's your Imagination,Pretend with it as you MUST.

Spotters are for Observation...a scope simply totes a reticle,until it's needed.

Now you "know" too.

Hint.................

You can believe what you want, but you will still be wrong.

Facts and Physics don't need "belief".

Hint.............

Busheler - if you don’t have anything of substance and relevance to add to the discussion, please leave it.

You haven't the faculties,to cypher a first clue.

Someone who "knows" and "does" as "much" as you...will always be best served by asking questions,rather than giving "answers".

Hint..............

LOL, if you only knew.

In the words of one of my wife’s students (speaking to one of his friends): If I wanted to kill myself, I would climb up to your ego and jump down to your IQ.

8. We promote a friendly atmosphere for hunters to exchange ideas. Differences of opinions are welcome and are an important part of this format. We do not, however, tolerate those that try to start an argument with every post. If you are looking to agitate people, simply to get a response or if you are a troller, this is not the place for you.

9. No personal attacks – if you disagree with someone, state your case intelligently and back it up with facts. You will be warned once. If the behavior continues, you will be banned from the forum for at least a month and possibly permanently.

Hint..............

Hate see folks spend money,so very unwisely...............

You had nothing to say about where people spent their money. You only wanted to argue about scope clarity and show a picture of you and a chainsaw, probably your Grinder account profile pic.

You "forgot",how much you "don't care". Bless your heart.

"Clarity" is a ruse. Hint.

Mechanical aptitude,is not. Hint.

I have seen a chainsaw.



Your Insecurities are very WELL founded...............

Ooopsie...I just "happen" to have a scope.



Hint.........................

busheler, i think i understand why you like fixed, simplicity of the scope so less to go wrong (could be wrong) but, what variable scopes do you like?

Less moving parts and less parts in summation,simply reduce the odds of failure. The only Variables I suffer anymore,are 1-4x SWFA's pinned to 4x,so that their reticles match their erectors,regarding subtention values.

I have puked too many Variables,so as a rule,avoid them like the plague.................

So then you still have nothing of substance or relevance to add to this thread?

Nope...only Facts and Physics,which exceed your "abilities" to "understand".

Slow day.




Optics is all "new" to me. laughing!



Though in fairness...all of my stuff is Safe Queens. Hint.



NEVER gets "used".






Safe Queen A

Safe Queen B

Safe Queen C

Hint...............

I know a lot on this forum have issues with Busheler. His approach has the feathery touch of a sledgehammer but it's wildly entertaining. I just don't take any of this as seriously as some and find it funny as sh*t. I'm well aware I'm probably in the minority on all of the above.

Below made me laugh.

Refreshing it is.
Gets old watching the self-appointed eggsperts with their "look at me" dispositions and the kochgobblers that follow them around, doting on their every word.
Most of whom are on this thread.

I have no issue with disagreement. I have politely disagreed with several of our local gurus on this thread. What I find astonishing is a level of ignorance that many could only aspire to.

I also can't help but enjoy the irony of a keyboard warrior questioning the facts, physics, and abilities of a mechanical engineer (myself) just because I disagree with him. Clearly some major insecurities.

The past few days have essentially gone from normal discussion to this guy pulling out a measuring tape for his johnson for all of us. Anyone with any sense at all can see that he's compensating for something. What he's compensating for (lack of brain cells or genital cells or both) is anyone's guess.

I’m entertained. That’s all I know.

Bingo

I challenge you to find one single post of anyone self appointed themselves an expert. However, there are some people whom recieve lots of PMs per week asking for help, and they receive that help, all the way until the problem is gone.

And your boy. He is gone. Shocker!

He is mentally I'll. You've hooked your wagon to an obvious crazy man.

I don’t doubt that he is crazy. He’s also obnoxious. I just don’t take him seriously, and he’s entertaining.

Or was, rather. I didn’t expect it to last long.

He became mud mixed in a gravel road being built. Just a nuisance.

Like I mentioned before, he is quite knowledgeable. If only he could share his knowledge in a less maniacal fashion, which he did for a time on another forum, but he apparently could not maintain any semblance of calm. It appears that he was ejected from that forum, but I don’t know that as fact. He just can’t play well with others, but finds it more fun to be insulting and disruptive. It’s a shame.

Shut your pie hole. Why did you assume I was talking about you? Are you that self-important?

I'm entertained

Good to see a person use every new and old bullet and caliber imaginable and putting it to use on animals

I don't understand half the crap he writes but atleast he provides picture books with his writing

Shut your pie hole?

You said "most of whom are on this thread".

Another internet tough guy that wouldnt dare speak to someone like that in person. You are still "that guy" that supported a certified crazy man. Wear it with honor.

Yes. I liked the picture books too.

I'll pour one out tonight for Busheler.

Sure I would. I have no qualms in calling a side a spade. Those that know me will concur. There are a few on here.

As far as Larry goes, I will concede that his delivery is a bit "rough" and difficult to cypher at times. I've "known" him for almost a decade, have spoken with him on the phone to discuss technical reloading stuff, and know he is the real deal.
Crazy? I don't know. He Is a rifle looney like most of us that have a clue in such topics.

There are folks on this thread that I consider to be experts in specific areas. We are probably thinking about the same folks. From time to time I disagree with them. But I don’t think i’ve ever seen any of those folks saying anything that was flat out wrong. Opinions, however, can vary considerably.

This is a good forum, with knowledgeable folks that are usually polite, and the forum is well managed (policed, if I may).

And I agree that Larry/busheler and under several other aliases is a knowledgeable looney. The only problem is that most of what we see is the looney, and personally I don’t care to sift through all that for a few nuggets of rifle or reloading wisdom. We can get all the info we need from folks that stay on their meds.