Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics ADVICE...REDFIELD vs VORTEX...WHAT TO BUY??

Nasgam..

I saw that review about a month ago. I did not agree with much of it because he compared scope over to wide of a price range. If he wanted to be fair to the Nikon and Redifeild scopes, he SHOULD have used a Vortex corssfire- at the same price- he did not. He used a $200 Diamaondback.

More apples to organges. Also some of the guy's reviewing techniques are too subjective to me. He also seems to be funded or afflitiated with SWFA- another Vortex dealer.I could be worng about that.

To me the deck was stacked against the Nikon and Redfeild in that "test". One thing is for sure- that guy is no John Barsness when it comes toreviewing optics..

I just got my 2-7 Redfield in today.

My take on the adjustments is this-

The scope is NOT designed to be a target or tactical scope. It is a $130 Hunting scope.

From what I can tell so far, the adjustment clicks work fine for their purpose.. The tracking is the most important part. Clicks or no clicks.

While I agree that the adjustments may work fine, when the Redfield was put up against other hunting scopes of the same class it was found to be wanting in the tactile sense. The worrisome part to me was that the adjustment didn't feel the same in both directions. That indicates to me a possible issue with the machining or the assembly of the scope.
Will it make a difference in the RW, probably not. It does however get put into the mix as a possible factor when one is making a decision on which scope to get. Especially when all the other parameters are nearly equal.

N,

Based on the several Redfeilds I looked at before I bought mine and the 2-7 I have in hand, the adjustments seem to work fine in both directions.

It is very tough to make a TRULY compact turret adjustment with Truly crisp clicks with a coil spring/plunger setup used on modern scopes.

The old "V" leaf srpings used in the older click stop Weavers for example were/are as crips as glass- very, very distinct. And the leaf spring design they used is very compact. The problem is no modern engineer will use a leaf spring if he can use a coil spring.

To get a large enough coil spring to provide enough tension/crispness, it requires a larger, taller turret than what is on the Redfeild,IMHO.

Heck, I have seen Target scopes with well respected names and high price tags that have clicks no more crisp than the Redfeilds.

And Like I said, judging a $130 US made hunting scope by Target /Tactical requirements is not exactly logical.

Jim,
I don't think Koshkin is affiliated in any way with SWFA. Even if he were, SWFA also is a Redfield dealer.
I did some checking on RW prices and found a max difference in price on the scopes included in Koshkins test to be +$40 for the Vortex.
The other scopes are closer +$35 for the FF2, +$20 for the 3200, +$10 for the Nikon.

I would also contend that Koshkin is more of an optical engineer than JB. I believe JB would even admit that. JB has it all over Koshkin in the field experience arena but the science and quantification edge goes to Koshkin.
Your point about the design of the turrets is taken.

Jim, doesn't matter whether or not I agree with your scope choice- I do agree with your sentiment about buying American. At some point the price differential on apples to apples items may become too much for a lot of folks but wherever possible I try to buy A) American and B) anything but China or Mexico if at all plausible - followed by a list of countries I prefer over others. I will stay neutral on the Redfield vs Vortex but do applaud your efforts at saying something we should all consider. just my 2 cents folks.

Nas and K..

I agree with your overall sentiments posted above. Ans I might add, MOST any optical review is going to be subjective- no matter who does it. Everyone sees differently and everyhone looks for differnt things in a scope either mechaniaclly or optically.

One thing about any direct Vortex / Refield comparison in terms of cost is the fact are pretty much right in between the two Vortex Crossfire and Dimaondback lines so an exact comparison is not really posssible.As you did in your review K, you just have to do the best you can.

One thing is for sure, nobody is curing cancer critiquing hunting optics, so it is litterally a matter of tow each his own..

So far, I think the Redeild is a lot of scope for the $$$ .It will be intertesting for me to see how it compares to others I now have and will be aquiring.

Is SWFA a bad thing around here? I've never seen much positive posted about them.

Actually Marc,

I like SWFA overall..

I have ordered sevral things from them over the years and been treated fairly.

Some folks don't like them as they have had different experiences. There have been some issues with them taking orders for stuff they do not have in stock or them not backing up their lowest price guarantees.

I have always gotten around the "in stock" issue by calling them directly and asking if they have the item on hand before I order. I do that with any online company.

I think the main issue with SWFA here is just loyalty to Cameraland.

Well Nsa..

Doug is a straight up guy and I have never heard of the instock issues/price guarantee issues with him, either.

And I do know several folks who have had those problems with SWFA..

SWFA really stepped into it about a year or two ago over the Nikon 6x Monarch closeout mess. It was not pretty.

That thread went on for months.

I ordered stuff years ago from SWFA and they were fine. Last time I tried stuff wasn't in stock but they did send an email and let me cancel the order. Cameraland has been good to me, not a single complaint.

The anti-SWFA surge here at 24HCF goes back well before CLNY was remotely associated with the 'Fire.

What was the deal George?

jim,

I don't recall the original poster asking anything about Vortex Crossfires compared to Redfields, he asked about Diamondbacks compared to Redfields.

Seems the review you were squawking about wanting surfaced from someone with I'm going to guess has about 50 times the experience with optics that you do.

His test slammed your arguement in the face, so now your reaching for straws by saying the review was brand bias and bringing up scope models that were never part of the discussion because you can't come up with anything else to support your arguement.

If anyone here is blindly brand bias its you, if you haven't figured it out yet, I can assure you everyone else here has.

Bill

Don't know what Jim has been up to lately as I've had him on ignore for some time.

I took about 3 minutes a couple of month's ago and read some of his posts, 80% of them are conflict, correcting or demeaning somebody. He might have a bit of knowledge but when it comes to optics Koshkin has him trumped very heavily. When it comes to Leupold or Redfield, I can swear that Jim and Eremicus are sisters. Eremicus has mellowed so I took him (only other person) off ignore.

Swamp

Don't let the typical optics forum hissy fits give you any indigestion. Go to a sportmans warehouse/bass pro shop and look at and thru the new Redfield, in my opinion it is a lot of scope for the money based on looks alone. Next call up Doug and Cameraland and have him send you one of the Vortex scopes on evaluation. Make your own mind up. Finally the viper's are made in the Philippines according to the guy I spoke to at Vortex. Secondly I am very happy with the level of interest and support I got on speaking to them on their customer line. They actually put two scopes on a collimator for me to see where the parallax was set at and if it varied over the power range (it did not), but I think I am going to buy a fixed X scope this time anyway.

I was not reaching at straws. Just made some observations.

If you would READ the subsequent posts both of us made to each other, you would see I realised and admited that he could not really find a Vortex scope that was the exact price as the Redfield as the it is priced right in between the same Crossfire and Diamondback offerings.

I realize he did the best he could with what was avialable to him and acknowledged that. The discussion was between him and I- not you. But thanks so much for your totally worthless imput on the matter..

No body "trumped" anyone.Based on the places he had posted before-on the SWFA forums it looked like he was hooked up with them.

His opinions are still subjective- all optics tests are. I also don't consider them to be definitive. Unlike you,I can think for myself.

As far as "Emericus" goes, you seem to be infatuated with him.. You are always mentioning him in posts. I think you are queer for the guy.

Swamphunter,

Please let us know which one you choose - I'd be interested in hearing your opinion on your purchase. Thanks!

Swamphunter and Kimber7man. I have both brands but not in the magnification range you looking at. I have punished both brands. So far to date, 1 of my 2 Redfields have went back, none of any of my Vortex products have went back. Most of the Vortex products I have had over 2-3 years.

With that said, I must agree the Redfields are a ton of scope for the $$$$

Much is pending on what you want. Optically the Diamondback is a bit ahead of the Redfield in contrast and clarity. Eye relief goes to the Redfield but the DB is very useable. Ergonomics go to the Redfield as the DB has a larger ocular.

YMMV... Dollar for dollar, I prefer the DB even though it's a bit more costly.