Estimated reading time: 12 minutes
I recently got my hands on a Riton (pronounced “right-on”) X3 Conquer 6-24×50, which is a budget offering that targets the long-range shooting crowd. I love high-end, high-dollar rifle scopes, but I also enjoy budget-friendly, feature-packed options that function well. At a glance, the X3 Conquer seems to be a good option with its 6-24x magnification range, 10 yd – infinity parallax (for you .22lr shooters), 21 MRAD of elevation adjustment, first focal plane reticle, and zero stop turrets. But do I still feel this way after putting the optic through heavy use in the field? Below, I’ll discuss the interesting features, share a tracking test and explain my thoughts on both.
First Impressions
Immediately after taking the X3 Conquer out of the box, I had high hopes. The turrets felt crisp with positive detents, possibly more so than some more expensive optics that I’ve used. The magnification ring turned with little effort, and the MPSR reticle is functional and efficient, featuring a floating center dot (my favorite). looking through the optic, I found large black margins around the sight picture which suddenly gave the impression of a cheap optic. The eye relief of the X3 Conquer was noticeably picky. at low power the eye-box was reasonable, but at 24x, it got much smaller and I found myself searching for the sight picture when my cheek weld shifted slightly. At a glance, the optical clarity seemed just fine, even with a bit of edge distortion. However, I changed my opinion about this with increased use.
The next thing to do was mount it on my test rifle. I paired this optic with a set of Seekins Precision 30mm medium height rings and got it mounted up. Once mounted plumb with the proper eye relief set, I bore sighted the optic and attempted to install the zero stop collar. This process upset me for a few reasons: first, the Allen wrench needed to remove the turret is a different size than what is needed to install the zero stop. It’s 2023… make turret adjustments toolless, or at least design your product to require as few tools as possible for set-up. Second, I had to screw the zero stop collar down over a rubber O-ring onto the turret post. I thought this must surely be wrong because of the tight fit that it was. I checked Riton’s instructions for installation which confirmed this to be the right way then continued to screw the zero stop over the O-ring, which caused the turret to adjust and change my zero. After needing to totally bottom out my turret so it wouldn’t turn while installing the zero stop, it was finally installed. However, the O-ring paid the price because it was now torn in half. This will go down as the most difficult, most damaging zero-stop setting experience that I’ve had to date.
Tracking Test
After the relatively rough start I had with the Riton X3 Conquer 6-24×50, I was excited to get into a less subjective aspect for testing; turret tracking accuracy. Possibly the most important thing about an optic, especially for those who are long-range shooting oriented, is that it tracks with utmost precision. This means that when 10 MIL are dialed on the turret, the reticle is moved by the internal mechanics of the scope exactly 10 MIL and so on. With today’s advancements in technology and the heavy use of computerized machinery, this is becoming less and less of a problem but must be tested nonetheless. The test that I chose to use in this experiment is called the “tall target test.” In this test, a target that has been leveled with gravity, or by a bubble level, is placed 100 yards downrange. On this target, there is a point of aim at the bottom and a vertical line that extends approximately 35 or so inches upward. First, a group is fired at the point of aim. Then the optic is adjusted ~10 MIL up and another group is fired at the same point of aim. Results should yield a group at the point of aim as well as another approximately 32” up on the vertical line. This shows that the vertical adjustment on the scope adjusts purely for elevation. Math can then be used to determine with what accuracy it does so. A similar step can then be performed to check the windage as well.
Because the precision of the rifle is of the highest importance for this test, I chose to use my most accurate rifle, a custom rifle built with a savage target action, criterion barrel chambered in 308 Winchester, and a Duplin bipod to name a few of the most important parts. For the test, I used ammunition from my personal stash of reloaded ammo which featured a 185 grain Berger Juggernaut Tactical bullet. I chose these because they have proven themselves to shoot a consistent <1/4 MOA out of my gun. The distance was confirmed to be exactly 100.5 yards with a Leupold RX 2800 as well as a Terrapin X rangefinder. The first 3 shots fired at my point of aim went through basically the same hole, just below the bullseye. Then I dialed up 8.5 MIL (the maximum elevation adjustment available for me was only 8.7 MIL) and shot another group while maintaining my original point of aim. This yielded 3 shots in another tiny group located right on top of the vertical reference line. After measuring the distance between the groups, I took the 31.5625” which the tape showed and used it in the following formula to find the expected distance between groups and extrapolate the accuracy with which this scope tracked:
***Distance from target x MRAD value dialed x MRAD to inches conversion factor = expected point of impact in inches***
***100.5 yards x 8.5 mil x 0.036 inches/mil*yard = 30.753 inches***
Using the expected value of 30.753” and the actual value of 31.5625”, it was determined that the X3 Conquer tracked with 97.44% accuracy. This result is not one that I would call unacceptable, but it is lower than I expect out of long-range oriented optics. I’ve tested optics that are half this price and tracked within 99.9% accuracy, AKA: within my test setup’s limitations.
Next, the windage was tested in much the same way. After being returned to zero, and firing another 3-round group at my point of aim to confirm return, the X3 Conquer was dialed to the left 4.5 MIL and a 3-shot group was fired at the same point of aim as in the elevation test. Again, using our formula, we can determine the expected distance between the zeroed group and the one just fired. Doing this, we see an expected distance of 16.281” which can be compared to the measured value which I found to be 16.75”. Again, using these values, the windage turret tracking was found to be 97.2% accurate. At least the windage and elevation turrets are both tracking to the same level of precision.
***Distance from target x MRAD value dialed x MRAD to inches conversion factor = expected point of impact in inches***
***100.5 yards x 4.5 mil x 0.036 inches/mil*yard = 16.281 inches***
After the windage test group was fired, the optic was returned to zero and another 3 shots were fired to confirm an accurate return to zero, which it was.
The final observations I had during this test included the reticle being slightly crooked, paired with sub-par optical clarity. I suspected a crooked reticle when my bubble level on the optic was showing level, but the reticle didn’t line up properly with my plumbed target in the distance. During the test, I ignored the misaligned reticle and went off my scope bubble level. Doing so yielded groups on the target that showed perfect X and Y axis tracking by the turrets, leaving only the possibility that the reticle was crooked in my scope. I also had issues seeing the thick, black Sharpie line drawn on my target even though my target was white, it was a sunny day, and I was only 100 yards away. After continuing my testing at extended ranges and other lighting conditions, I still think the clarity was lacking for its price point, although consistently, through all lighting conditions.
Specifications and features
- Magnification: 6-24x
- parallax adjustment: 10 yd – infinity
- tube diameter: 30mm
- objective lense diameter: 50mm
- focal lense position: first focal plane
- lense coating: fully multi-coated, full wide band, waterproof coated, low light enhancement
- reticle: MPSR, illuminated
- FOV at 100 yards: 16.8 – 4.4 ft
- material: 6061-T6
- eye relief: 3.3 in / 85mm
- exit pupil: Low 8.2 – High 2.1mm
- click value: 1/10th MRAD
- adjustment range: 21 MRAD
- length: 14.12 in
- weight 27.1 oz
- included additional: flip-up lens covers, lens cloth, Allen wrench
- MSRP: $689.99
The Good
Regardless of my opinion on the X3 Conquer 6-24×50, Riton undeniably packed it with a handful of desirable features for a pretty low price. Most notably, the illuminated first focal plane (FFP) reticle, 10-yard-infinity parallax adjustment, and great 6-24x power range. MSRP for this optic is $689.99, but it can be found in many places for around $400.00 NIB.
My favorite aspect of this optic is probably the reticle design. The MPSR reticle has a floating center dot, 2/10th MIL hash marks, with a neat and clutter-free wind tree. This made holdovers easy and intuitive. This reticle is complimented with illumination. Six levels, with an off position between each, are located on the windage knob. The lowest level is quite low, while the highest level is just less than daylight bright. When I looked at a sun-covered background, it quickly washed out from a red-illuminated reticle to black.
This optic is covered under Riton’s warranty, which they dubbed, “The Riton Promise Warranty.” This includes the replacement of damaged goods regardless of the purchaser for a lifetime. However, their electro-optics warranty is only 2 years. They also promise to replace the item with a new product, not refurbished. And they promise to be in communication about warranty service within 2 days. But, the warranty is void if the damage incurred was purposeful, or from an attempt to repair or alter the optic by the user.
Final Thoughts:
This may be the first rifle scope I’ve reviewed where I’ve thought, “I would not buy this,” so take that for what you will. The tracking test was not the nail in the coffin for this optic, rather, it was a combination of poorer-than-expected clarity, tiny eye-box, laughable zero-stop design/installation, and crooked reticle for me. While I am on one, I also think that setting the MSRP at $689.99 but allowing anybody to sell this optic for $400.00 is a gross marketing ploy to make people feel like they are getting a mid-tier optic at a budget-level price. In the $400 price bracket, the Riton X3 Conquer would *almost* be a good option, saved only by its feature set. But in the $700.00 bracket… well, I’ve already told you I would not buy it.
learn more about the Riton Optics X3 Conquer 6-24×50 HERE
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! All Local Sales are FREE! ***
Other pictures:
Sounds like a piece of junk!
I’m sorry you had such a bad experience with your 3 Conquer 6-24×50. It’s a very popular optic for Riton and we experience very low problems with it. It sounds like yours should have been replaced. As a consumer and shooter myself I can understand the frustrations of something like this.
And as the guy that draws the reticles I’m very happy to see that you liked it.
Sorry you have a defect or issues with the product. I’m sure Riton would be more than happy to help you and send you a brand new one. I like my 3 conquer 6-24×50 and own several of them. I also recently (11/10/2024) took down a big 10 pointer buck using Riton mounted on my Remington 770 at precisely 130 yards high shoulder. Which was my shot placement. He dropped like a boulder. Although, my gear (rifle) or set up is not high end or custom build; as you’ve used for your test. I have built and made a few adjustments to them. I also create my own load development for long distance, which produces same hole to 1/4 in. groups; that I run with other calibers using Riton 3 conquer 6-24×50 with them. Such as ar platforms 5.56, 6.5 grendle, and Mossberg/Remington 30-06; which is an equivalent to 308. RitOn 3 conquer 6-24×50 seems to work well with all those platforms for me and don’t need spotting scopes at 100-200 yards with it’s crisps lenses. But I really like your article and wish you a better experience with your new optics.
If I was a country bent on overtaking by invasion another well armed, this is exactly the kind of 3rd rate products to flood their market with.
Within the trades, machining in particular, we denigrate such examples; for example a cheap lathe is labeled “lathe shaped object”. Decorated with features, none perform to expectations or standards.
Hence, example of a “target scope shaped object”.
It’s never been more important to mind “Made In …..” tags. Choose wisely.
Did you consider removing the o-ring, install the zero stop washer and then re-installing the o-ring?
After a few sleepless nights of pondering this comment, it’s occurred to me that this was the common sense thing to do. But to answer your somewhat rhetorical question, no.