AR Sponsor
Posted: 10/28/2014 9:07:23 AM EDT
| Anyone ever run their Viper PST hard? Specifically the 1-4. Did you use it in a class or in a harsh environment? I was just curious as to what kind of punishment these scopes can take? I think it would be awesome if Vortex would do a torture test video or something similar showing how rugged these scopes are. |
| I don't drop my rifles onto the ground, but this may be of assistance. |
|
That is pretty cool. I have a PST and a Razor HDII, OP. I have only had the PST in rain and snow, and trips to the range, so i can't speak to durability, yet. According to ol' jukeboxx, the PST isn't rugged enough for his torture 
Seems like a solid unit to me, and I am replacing an old spotting scope with one of the Vortex units. I am pretty happy with their products, and may be adding one of the higher mag units to my .308 |
|
Quoted: That is pretty cool. I have a PST and a Razor HDII, OP. I have only had the PST in rain and snow, and trips to the range, so i can't speak to durability, yet. According to ol' jukeboxx, the PST isn't rugged enough for his torture Seems like a solid unit to me, and I am replacing an old spotting scope with one of the Vortex units. I am pretty happy with their products, and may be adding one of the higher mag units to my .308 Quoted: That is pretty cool. I have a PST and a Razor HDII, OP. I have only had the PST in rain and snow, and trips to the range, so i can't speak to durability, yet. According to ol' jukeboxx, the PST isn't rugged enough for his torture Seems like a solid unit to me, and I am replacing an old spotting scope with one of the Vortex units. I am pretty happy with their products, and may be adding one of the higher mag units to my .308 |
|
Quoted:
They are solid, just not "mil-spec" solid when compared with Nightforce/Trijicon. That's the feeling I get from my pair of PSTs. Very well built, but with how incredibly light they are they just feel like if the rifle took a fall they might not fare so well. Luckily that's what the warranty is for. I'm very happy with my PSTs, and for my usage I don't need to spend 3x more on a scope. I'd recommend them to anyone. |
|
Quoted:
can you elaborate on this? Quoted:
Quoted:
I like the PSTs and I think they are good scopes. However, if you look around the web for PST issues you'll figure out why there are no torture test out there. can you elaborate on this? Quoted:
I love my PST 1-4. Have two of them. One had the windage knob fall off  . Vortex replaced itThere's one example. If you search around you will see they do not do well on braked magnums. There are also reports of lenses coming loose and other turret issues. They are still good scopes but they are not the most durable out there. |
|
Everytime I hear "its not milspec tough" I think of one of my favorite quotes.
"If you drop a soldier in the middle of a desert with a rock, a hammer, and an anvil, tell him not to touch any of it, and come back two hours later, the anvil will be broken". "Because soldiers gotta f*** with shit". |
|
Quoted: Everytime I hear "its not milspec tough" I think of one of my favorite quotes. "If you drop a soldier in the middle of a desert with a rock, a hammer, and an anvil, tell him not to touch any of it, and come back two hours later, the anvil will be broken". "Because soldiers gotta f*** with shit". Just messing with you.  |
|
Quoted: What exactly makes an optic "milspec?" There's not a TDP for optics or anything... If Aimpoint Micros are used and accepted on actual M4 Block II/clones then that imo is "mil-spec" or I guess "mil soldier-spec".
|
|
Quoted:
Anything the military uses of course even thats not what "mil-spec" is.
If Aimpoint Micros are used and accepted on actual M4 Block II/clones then that imo is "mil-spec" or I guess "mil soldier-spec". Quoted:
Quoted:
What exactly makes an optic "milspec?" There's not a TDP for optics or anything...
If Aimpoint Micros are used and accepted on actual M4 Block II/clones then that imo is "mil-spec" or I guess "mil soldier-spec". And even that means nothing, Ive killed Aimpoints before. Anything can break if pushed too far. |
|
Quoted:
And even that means nothing, Ive killed Aimpoints before. Anything can break if pushed too far. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What exactly makes an optic "milspec?" There's not a TDP for optics or anything...
If Aimpoint Micros are used and accepted on actual M4 Block II/clones then that imo is "mil-spec" or I guess "mil soldier-spec". And even that means nothing, Ive killed Aimpoints before. Anything can break if pushed too far. Yes anything can break but it does mean something. Aimpoints are much less likely to break than your primary arms mini dot or (insert budget red dot). All you're doing when paying for quality is improving your chances of it not breaking. |
|
Quoted:
That's the feeling I get from my pair of PSTs. Very well built, but with how incredibly light they are they just feel like if the rifle took a fall they might not fare so well. Luckily that's what the warranty is for. I'm very happy with my PSTs, and for my usage I don't need to spend 3x more on a scope. I'd recommend them to anyone. Quoted:
Quoted:
They are solid, just not "mil-spec" solid when compared with Nightforce/Trijicon. That's the feeling I get from my pair of PSTs. Very well built, but with how incredibly light they are they just feel like if the rifle took a fall they might not fare so well. Luckily that's what the warranty is for. I'm very happy with my PSTs, and for my usage I don't need to spend 3x more on a scope. I'd recommend them to anyone. The best warranty is the one you never need. |
|
Quoted:
Yes anything can break but it does mean something. Aimpoints are much less likely to break than your primary arms mini dot or (insert budget red dot). All you're doing when paying for quality is improving your chances of it not breaking. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What exactly makes an optic "milspec?" There's not a TDP for optics or anything...
If Aimpoint Micros are used and accepted on actual M4 Block II/clones then that imo is "mil-spec" or I guess "mil soldier-spec". And even that means nothing, Ive killed Aimpoints before. Anything can break if pushed too far. Yes anything can break but it does mean something. Aimpoints are much less likely to break than your primary arms mini dot or (insert budget red dot). All you're doing when paying for quality is improving your chances of it not breaking. I was referring to the 'mil soldier-spec' remark. How many military personnel are using primary arms red dots? Not too many, and not because the troop decided against it, but because the aimpoint was issued. Its funny that you think there is such a thing as a milspec optic. A quality optic is a quality optic, regardless of who uses it. And I say all of this as someone who has served and continues to serve. So getting back on topic. Claiming a Vortex isn't up to par because a military unit doesn't use them is a ridiculous assumption of both the quality and procurement process. |
|
Funny that I comment on mine and now a week later mine poops out on me.
When I got it I could shoot MOA or just under with several loads now it strings vertically 3-5 MOA. Took the scope off and tried some irons with match ammo and got some nice round sub 2 MOA groups |
|
Quoted:
Funny that I comment on mine and now a week later mine poops out on me. When I got it I could shoot MOA or just under with several loads now it strings vertically 3-5 MOA. Took the scope off and tried some irons with match ammo and got some nice round sub 2 MOA groups What did you have it on? Contact Vortex, they will make it right. |
|
Quoted: I was referring to the 'mil soldier-spec' remark. How many military personnel are using primary arms red dots? Not too many, and not because the troop decided against it, but because the aimpoint was issued. Its funny that you think there is such a thing as a milspec optic. A quality optic is a quality optic, regardless of who uses it. And I say all of this as someone who has served and continues to serve. So getting back on topic. Claiming a Vortex isn't up to par because a military unit doesn't use them is a ridiculous assumption of both the quality and procurement process. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: What exactly makes an optic "milspec?" There's not a TDP for optics or anything... If Aimpoint Micros are used and accepted on actual M4 Block II/clones then that imo is "mil-spec" or I guess "mil soldier-spec". And even that means nothing, Ive killed Aimpoints before. Anything can break if pushed too far. Yes anything can break but it does mean something. Aimpoints are much less likely to break than your primary arms mini dot or (insert budget red dot). All you're doing when paying for quality is improving your chances of it not breaking. I was referring to the 'mil soldier-spec' remark. How many military personnel are using primary arms red dots? Not too many, and not because the troop decided against it, but because the aimpoint was issued. Its funny that you think there is such a thing as a milspec optic. A quality optic is a quality optic, regardless of who uses it. And I say all of this as someone who has served and continues to serve. So getting back on topic. Claiming a Vortex isn't up to par because a military unit doesn't use them is a ridiculous assumption of both the quality and procurement process. |
|
Quoted:
What did you have it on? Contact Vortex, they will make it right. Quoted:
Quoted:
Funny that I comment on mine and now a week later mine poops out on me. When I got it I could shoot MOA or just under with several loads now it strings vertically 3-5 MOA. Took the scope off and tried some irons with match ammo and got some nice round sub 2 MOA groups What did you have it on? Contact Vortex, they will make it right. Scar 17 and not very long. Maybe 500 rounds. I will sell it when I get it replaced because I don't trust it on my Scar and I was wanting something with higher magnification anyway. |
AR Sponsor