I just don't see it, dudes. A new company....with a cute name.....but no history of building optics much less quality ones......bursts onto the market suddenly.......and every one raves and buys. What is up with that? Everyone knows the Leupolds and others are the masters of reliability of their products due to decades in the business.

Seems like a marketing success to me. Vortex ads are EVERYWHERE! And people are raving about 'em and lining up to buy 'em. But they are a young company with unproven designs. Plus....where did they get there glass and prizm coating and mechanical expertise or people? The big 3 have decades of experience building top end binos. Vortex is a child. Why buy an unproven bino from a young company for that much money?

With sooooooo many other similar choices like Minox, Meopta, Kahles, Kowa, Leupold to choose from in the comparable price range..............why choose the inexperienced, unproven Vortex???

Please enlighten me and tell me what I'm missing here.

And don't hold back, either. I REALLY wanna know.

I gave them a shot and have been impressed so far. I have 2 pair, the 10x42 Razors and the 15x56 Kaibabs. I am rough on equipment and so far so good.

I needed a pair of 15x's and the Swarovski would not fit my eyes so the Vortex was a logical choice. I also needed a pair of 10x's that I could have as a backup to my Swarovski 10x's and they were mid range with a fantastic warranty.

Time will tell if they are reliable but I'm not too worried about them, I think they will continue to be good glass for not a lot of money.

Why?
For me it's because of initial quality and what I have seen first hand. The product they are putting out is comparable to the big three and less expensive. Same for the Minox which I love. They are comparable and less expensive.
I think the big three prices are over inflated and for the average to upper average hunter they are going out of the price range for many.
I go with the unproven company because I look for the next best thing. In this case Vortex and Minox both to me are the next best thing. They are half the price of the big three and just as good. I just got a set of the Vortex 15x56's and they are just as good as the Swaro 15x56's and half the cost. It's a no brainer.
Just because they are young doesn't mean they are no good. They are excellent. I just hope their customer service holds up when its time to be used.
You gotta remember that engineers, designers, and the such get passed around between companies a lot. Minox I think had some Leica guys when they got their start. Docter had Zeiss guys and so on. So for me if the optic looks good and works and I can save some coin I'll go that route all the time.
Who knows maybe in 5 years or so you'll be all into the new stuff and done with the big three. How anyone can afford big three optics and even Leupold scopes nowadays is interesting.

So thats where I come from when I review and look at optics. I look for the next best thing and call it how I see it. So far all I have seen is nice bins from Minox and Vortex with the exception of the 1st generation 15x58 Minox with the center diopter. The ones Doug sells are the better and new generation model. I still wish someone would make a true 15x60 bin. But no dice, just dreams I guess.

Kique

.

Know nothing about Vortex. Haven't bought anything from them nor looked at them in shops.

But have nothing against new companies entering the market either.

I buy from old, well-established firms and am happy to do it.

But I like to help a new guy get into business too when I can.


I eat at the old, reliable standby restaurants. But I will try the new guy too. Heck, one of these days I will find one that knows how to make blackberry cobbler.


.

Vortex has been around for awhile, not much younger than Minox. They seemed to have targeted and been successful in putting themselves in the Minox demographic. One step under the big three and above the mids like Nikon, Pentax, Leupold. Kowa, Kahles, Meopta, who knows, could be marketing.

What I see with Minox and now Vortex is producing product out of the 8x32,8x42,10x42 glut. They have those but also say 10x52, 13x56 and the big thing is Bigeyes. They produce a decent quality high power bino that was the big three's main domain and what they were famous for, their big binos are their flagship product. When you think of Swaro the first thing in your mind is 15X56 bigeyes.

If Pentax or Nikon would have done that they would be right there also. They get lost in the budget 8 and 10 power questions though.

Vortex made a huge step with the Kaibab, their original 15X50 was a bust, now they have a winner and a flagship bigeye.

I'm a Minox fan that will buy a Kaibab because it actually fits my face. I'm not going to trade my HGs for Razors though...



Kent

Vortex = Eagle Optics. Eagle Optics has been around a good while and has a VERY good reputation for handling any and all problems quickly and courteously. That's why I don't mind giving them the benefit of the doubt.

My one and only Vortex is the red dot they call the strikeFire. The reason I bought it was it was a "middle of the road" quality red dot sight that had a good reputation for holding zero. Most I found were either paintball junk or very expensive like the Aimpoint and EOtech. The rifle it goes on is a dedicated plinker and doesn't need "bet your life" quality optics on it.

So for the StrikeFire has worked great and I feel like it was money well spent.

Terry

I was skeptical, as well, and for most of the same reasons.

I bought my 2-7 Viper on recommendation from Doug @ Cameraland. Actually, it was the first (of what turned out to be MANY...) things from Doug, so I was trying them BOTH out. Doug has a sterling reputation on this site, and many others. I figured he wasn't going to jeopardize that just to have something new to sell, especially when he already carries the Big 3.

I've been thrilled with the scope AND the guys who sold it to me.

My take is that the Vortex (Eagle Optics) people were known in many circles beforehand, and they put product into the hands of writers/dealers without the extra hype/push/come-for-a-canned-hunt-weekend that one usually sees. Sure, Vortex advertises a lot, but they've also let their product do the talking.

Gun writers aside, I've also seen a very high ratio of favorable to unfavorable reports on Vortex products from hunters who've actually used them.

I can't say the same of Leatherwood, Leapers, Hunter, etc.

My experience with 2 Vortex riflescopes and 1 spotter, is that they offer one of the highest bangs for the bucks in the optics world right now. I won't be replacing my Conquests with Vipers, but Vortex's will certainly be in the mix for all my future scope purchses.

FC

Trying a blemished Vortex binocular from Doug seemed like a good bet. At least on my hunting budget.
The 8.5 Diamondbacks were inexpensive and great for a weekend work trip to the lease or ranch. I have others, but the size and quality of these work well for me.


stumpy

Mule Deer's quote by John Locke pretty much sums it up
"New opinions are always suspect, and usually opposed, without any other reason but because they are not already common."

I don't know much about Vortex either but was impressed when I talked with them at SHOT and am expecting to receive some of their products this season to actually test for a season in Alaska. They have obviously jumped into the making of good optics with both feet and it looks like they might have the products and pricing to stay.

I bought the Vortex Viper on Doug's recommendation and i like it. My other scopes include lower end Leupolds and Zeiss Conquest. If I want a sleek, low weight scope I always go with Leupold. But I wanted to try something different and have been pleased with the bolder cross hairs and crisper sight pictures with Zeiss and Vortex. Ditto the previous comments on Minox binos... I don't think I can afford the defibrillator to use on my wife when she sees the purchase cost of Swarovskis...

I guess I'm the kind of guy who likes to put his money into known products that I can get my money back out of, if I need to. I really can't keep up with the latest and greatest.

Leupold scopes
Zeiss Classic 10x40 bino's
Leica LRF
Rem 700's

I dont have enough experience here to "enlighten" you, however i can give my experiences.

I bought my dad a Leupold (I belive a vx2, in the range of 1-4x... 1.5-4x, whichever it was). I bought it based upon the name alone, and everyone in stores and online stated Leupy was the way to go.

I paid a little under 300 for it. I went on the vast experience and rec's of others and I assumed it was going to be a great scope.

It wasnt, for the money.

He disliked it and i didnt believe him. I really didnt believe him.

I tried it, and found it to be darker (as in not as bright) as my peception of my scopes. So we did side-by-sides with my two scopes, a inexpensive bushnell 1.5-4x shotgun scope and a burris XER 1-4.

Outdoors, in the woods, and at the range, both of my scopes (bushnell & burris) had clearer, brighter image when set on the same power settings.

I'll admit, we deemed tracking to be irrelevant, as once we sight in we leave it. I have never had an issue with holding zero with any of the 3 (shotgun slugs and ML usage) so that is moot as well.

It wasnta fair comparison, I agree, since the bushnell was WAY less $$ and the burris was about 10-15% less. So the more expensive, "better", more recommended Leupy came in 3rd.

All my experience. So we sold it. Bought a bushnell for half the price and he is WAY more satisfied.

So in my experiences (which frankly is what matters to me more than anything, right?) the leupold bought on reputation failed in the value for the $ category.

I have noticed that it is VERY in fashion on 24hcf ot bash anyone who voices a negative experience with Leupold. So be it. I was there, you werent.

When shopping for a "real" pair of binocs, I moved away from the hunting forums that were saturated with VERY $$ recommendations and leupolds, and read a lot of birdwatching reviews.

Since my prior experiences with "brand name shopping" wasnt without warts, I opened up my mind to ANY product that got great reviews and was deemed a good $ to performance ratio.

I decided on one brand, and upon contacting the optics guru (doug) he recommended a "used" pair of vortex vipers in my price range. They got great reviews, I had heard of him and he gets excellent reviews himself, and I liked that he didnt paint wiht a one-or-two brand brush.

in short, the viper vortex binocs exceeded my expectations on every metric I can think of (except perhaps overall size...).

So, not only are they better than anything else I tried in the price range, i got a great deal as well.

that was the opposite experience I got from the, in my opinion and experience, very over rated and overpriced Leupolds.

Yes, perhaps had a moved to the next $$ level and paid 600 the peups would shine. However, that wasnt the point.

Flame away, no biggie. The OP asked, so I am illustrating the mindset of someone who bought a pair of Vortex's and was extremely happy (as compared to the "accepted" leader / name brand).

NOTE: I am not a leupold hater, and will in all likelihood buy a pair of their Yosemites for my son. I am just using my real life experience as an example of why some people have no issue trying a new(er) brand out over the more traditional choice.

I dont know the first thing about Vortex optics, though they have clearly become a favorite amongst many hunters. IMO the Big 3 have begun to outprice their product from the general public for no reason other than their higher price does not offer a realisticaly higher value in performance. There are so many excellent optics available in the $600-$900 range that I cant fathom spending over $2K on a pair of binos, especially for the wee bit better performance. I remember when a $1000 pair of binos was near the best out there, now they are $2200 and up! Thats ridiculous if you ask me. HD, APO, Swarovision, theres not a acronym or creative description of a feature that supports those high sticker prices IMO. And at a time when the American people are being more froogle than ever, I just cant see them selling to many of these high priced products to us. A guy can sell a $500 pair of Minox binos in the classifieds in less than 24 hours with little reduction in prices, the Leicas, Zeiss, and Swaro's have to be continually reduced for a week before they might sell, and in some cases they dont!

It's that "wee bit better" part that's always gotten my attention when it comes to optics.

20-some years ago, my bud and I were sitting there varmint hunting one day and I was admiring his new B&L 10x50s. Kept scanning fields with them, then picking up the Kmart Jap-made 10x50s I'd paid about $35 for in the mid 1970s.

At some point he asked what I thought of his new Bausch and Lombs. As I recall now, noted that they were a bit better than my old bargain basement glasses, but not 12 times better, as the price reflected.

Our warranty is about you, not us. It's about taking care of you after the sale. The VIP stands for Very Important Promise to you (our customers) that we will do the following:

Repair or replace your Vortex product for any reason at NO CHARGE TO YOU. It doesn't matter how it happened, whose fault it was, or where you purchased it.
�Unlimited lifetime Warranty
�Fully transferable
�No warranty card to fill out
�No receipt needed to hang on to
If you ever have a problem, no matter the cause, we promise to take care of you.


Obviously I copied this from our website ,but this is truly the way we do business. We look at it as if you are not happy we are not happy and that is the way it is and always will be. We are here for the long haul and strive to make our customers happy ,because with out you guys we have nothing. With that said if any of you ever have a problem contact me direct(800-426-0048 ext323) and I promise we will take care of you.


Scott P.
www.vortextactical.com

Although I've never used Vortex's warranty service, I did recently use Eagle Optic's. I bought my Dad a pair of Eagle Optics Rangers several years ago. Recently one of the eyecups quit working correctly. It still worked, but not like it was designed to. Anyway, these things were dirty as hell. My Dad manages a ranch in S. Texas and to say he's hard on stuff is an understatement. Since deer season is over down here, I mailed them out to EO for them to take a look at the eyecup issue. They were shipped back to me on the same day they received them. Probably within hours! They fixed the eyecup issue and cleaned them up for free. No charge, nada! That's what I call taking care of the customer!

-Dan

I married her.

Scott, welcome to the 'fire!

That "No Fault" warranty is amazing and I'm always happy to have more quality choices out there in the marketplace.

Don't have any Vortex products yet but they will surely be on my list for my next optics purchase.

Look forward to hearing more from you and your company in the future.

Why you say. Well why the hell not I say. If the established stuff was doing what everybody wanted the new stuff, Vortex in your example, would have fallen flat on it's butt in short order. Fact is that some established stuff has sat on its perceived laurels relying on brand loyalty for too much too long. Dude, that crap creates perception gaps and creates market voids. Nature abhors voids and vacuums. Private enterprise being what it is, those voids don't stay empty.

I say "go for it and good luck" to anybody who has nerve and gumption to start something new. Lots of folks tend to think that is somehow a black mark. As in all endeavors, some will fail, some won't.

Meanwhile stick to your established stuff. Your money, your choice. You will miss the view through some pretty amazing stuff.

As Scott stated they do have a great warranty, no doubt about it. I purchased a 6.5 to 20 viper series and was very unsatisfied with the optical quality comparing it to my Weaver Grand Slams. Wasn't even in the same ballpark. Sent it in to be checked out and they found nothing wrong. They happily sent the dealer a replacement unit, and the dealer refunded my money.

I will be willing to buy from them again but this time it won't be sight unseen.

I hgave 2 scopes and a spotter, all from Doug. Good clear stuff. Would buy more. Would like to try the 6x vipers but I'm long in that range. 6.5 minox if's and 7x42 fl's

Welcome Scott....glad to see a company that understands how to run a successful business

I did compare the top end Vortex to the top end Minox, Kahles, and Kowa binoculars.
Bought the Vortex, liked them best, can't say they are unfairly hyped.
I didn't compare with Meopta but understand they are very good but not cheap.

What I've noticed is if some new optic product(s) comes along, and they do regularly, and some who have bought them rave about'em, they get to be the "latest thing" that "everybody has to have."
I like to wait for a while and see what those with lots of field expereince have to say about them after being used in the field a few years. There are some who do understand how optics work and can be trusted to give us good, accurate information. That's what I want to see before spending my money on something new. E

Like Koshkin. He seems to have a "fair-to-middling" (TIC) grasp on all things optical, and has had some rather favorable things to say about the Vortex products he's put to the test.

I much prefer to listen to 458 Win, Mule Deer and JJHack. E

Optically, I have to use my own eyes because my eyes often disagree with what the optics tell others eyes.

For example, I tried out a pair of new Leica to replace my old Zeiss Classic 8x30, but returned them.

But if enough people are agreeing and talking about something it may be worth a try out.

I'm sixty now. I can't wait for another 10-15 years for one of these new companies to prove themselves. How old is Vortex, seems to me it's been around long enough to allay short term fears that the stuff is just going to fall apart or the manufacturer is going to default. Compared to hundred year old companies like Zeiss and Leica, Vortex has a long way to go, but who would of dreamed 10 years ago that GM would go bankrupt while Hyudai was doing just fine.

Zen Ray is very new, they have a ways to go before the prove themselves to even Vortex standards, but I think the optics look so good, and the price is low enough that I'm willing to take a gamble on them. If they fail I can settle back on my Ultravids, assuming Leica is still in business.

John

I have been using rifle scopes for more than forty years. I am not an expert, but I currently own about a dozen rifle and handgun scopes and red dot type sights. I have a Vortex Diamondback 3x9x40 scope and I have been shooting an AR 15 with a Strikefire mounted. I believe these Vortex products offer quality, performance and value far in excess of the prices paid. I know that there are better and more expensive optics on the market including Vortex products however, for many of us, Vortex optics have been very good products at very fair prices. I have a good friend that can afford the very best scopes on the market and that is what he buys. He has those scopes mounted on all of his rifles. If he would spend some of his money on practice ammo, instead of his $3500.00 rifles and his $2000.00 scopes, he would shoot a lot better and have a lot more fun. It's his money though, so to each their own.

Exactly. My eyes were less than impressed with VXIII's and VXII's for the $ they were asking. That doesn't make all the Leupold users wrong, it just makes me different. I can live with that.

However, I was quite pleased with the Viper, and feel I got more than I had to pay for. I liked it enough to buy another scope, and a spotter, too.

Others' experiences can be useful in determining what kind of company you're buying from. But they can't help you much in sizing up the individual product. You've got to look through an optic just the same way you have to try on a pair of boots.



I am a sample of 1. In the case of Vortex, it seems that there are enough samples of 1 to add up to some fairly widespread positive feedback.

Bottom line - look through some scopes/binocs, see what works best for you, and vote with your credit card.

FC

One nice thing about new and up-and-coming companies is that they will try thing that the other ones will not. Like the 6x32 Viper binocular. Not every hunter needs high power "Big-eyes" = and even those who do often can use a quality bino of lower power to first locate game. For most hunters a lightweight, handy, quality 6x will do all they need. That is the model I first ordered to do a field test on. Ron Spomer said he loved using his on his Mexican Muledeer hunt this past season and it is his current favorite.

Amen....6X 6.5X or 7X are still my favorites!!!

The warranty is great and all.... But lets not forget Chrish Farley's quote from Tommy Boy....

"I can crap in a box and warranty it, hell, I got spare time..."

What I don't hear is people actually talking about their optics. I've not looked over their binos, but if they're as crude as the riflescopes I saw at the last gun show, I'll take my money elsewhere.

Which model line?

Check out Enrique's review of the Vortex Kaibab, it sounds pretty impressive to me, and there have been other threads with positive revies of the Vortex optics.

Hey, we are neighbors, both Flathead Valley residents.

John

Steelhead gave a 3-9x40 Viper a run and seemed pleased with it.

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/2210942/2

To some extent, I have to agree with E here. All these new companies may be here to stay but no one really knows for sure. Over the years there have been many companies that slapped a name on a PR built product and then disappeared. On the other hand, when B&L started building the Elite series of scopes and bino's they proved themselves to be some of the very best optics available and still do to this day.

I've bought 2 Vortex scopes and 1 Vortex binos from Doug. The little 6.5x32 Raptors were all I carried last year. I was impressed enough with them and the way they held up to some rough wet use I ordered a 2x7x32 Viper to go on a 280 build. I was initially put off by the size of the eye piece but after shooting it I really like it. My only complaint is Doug didn't have any Vortex hats either time I ordered.

As much as I sorta respect E's opinion. I gotta say I do agree with him about the folk's he mentioned that he listened to. They do know there stuff.

I spend time in the field and I use my bins hard. I don't report much about rifle scopes or spotters because they rearely see action. My bins see the most work and get banged up the hardest. So I try and get a good feel for the bins I rave about. The Vortex Kaibab 15x56's I just reviewed if you read is my initial review and inital tests. As time goes on I might change my opinion and update my info. But on the first hunt with them they did well.
The Vultures I bought from Doug that were blemished for a buck and a half were very nice bins and they work well for the average hunter. They do well.

I am glad Scott joined the fire and answered my concerns about the customer service. I am not worried with these bins but glad I have a good person to support me if they crap on me. But to be honest with you I don't expect to.

I know many people brag about leupy scopes and Zeiss and Leica. Sure they are great, but do you really want to break your bank to buy from them? I don't. Then I think about it, and I wonder how many that brag about this or that have really looked at what else it out there. I for one have looked thru just about all 15x bins out there with a Objective lense of 56 or to 63mm. I do my home work and field work. I rely too much on my name to recommend junk. If I write it I mean it.
As far as Doug goes the man knows optics and has a excellent reputation. I don't think he would recommend crap either.

So while some are affraid of the unknown, I am having a blast playing with new bins and seeing if they hold up. Mama hates that I spend, but I get my use out of them.

Kique

I wouldn't have given them the benefit of the doubt cuz I kinda had the same way of thinking you did until I tried one of their products.

Doug had their little 8x28 Hurricane binoculars on sale for $90 due to color blemishes or something. I figured these would be great for my 7 yr old son and my cheap 8x32mms had just died and I wanted a new muzzle loader more than a quality pair of binoculars (I wish I'd have gotten the higher end binoculars and the Hurricanes but kept my old ML, but thats a different story) so I bought the Hurricanes.

They're incredible. Especially for their regular price of just $160 they're awesome, and I wouldn't balk at spending 2x that for the quality. I've used Leupold, Nikon, and Pentax in the field and these were nearly as good at a tiny fraction of the cost.

It is now my intention to buy up a few other of their products just to get a feel for their line... including a pair of their higher end binculars.

If you are skeptical do what I did and wade, don't dive, in. If your experience is anything like mine you'll be impressed!

I may be willing to take a chance on this one b/c of it's features and price.

http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/vortex.pl?page=vortexviperpst4-16x50

However, their top of the line Razor HD riflescope is a chance I am not willing to take at this time. If I were spending this amount of cash, I would save for a couple of more months and get a S&B PMII.

Whether my next "tactical" scope is Vortex or S&B, Doug will get my business just as he did yesterday.

I listened to Mule Deer. He had good things to say about the optics in the Vortex...

Scott_at_Vortex,

Welcome to the fire. I hope we talk only socially on the web and not professionally over a warranty issue.

I purchased the 6.5X32 Raptor binoc from Doug. They are so nice I retired my beloved 7-15X35 Nikons to the pickup. The bino-buddy from the Nikon is now on the Vortex. It is what I will be using to hunt with in the woods.

I made the change because the 6.5X32 was so much more clear than the Nikons, which are very good, that the Nikon had to be cranked up to 9X to make out the same detail. And this in a 19 ounce bino instead of a 30 ounce bino.

We're living in "the good ole days" of optics.

Thirty years ago, it was pretty much alpha and junk - with not much in between, the best I recall.

Now, there are so many really good choices for a fraction of alpha prices which get within 5-10% of alpha image - and some get within the 3-5% range, IMHO.

It seems to me that this change has really come into its own in the last few years especially, and I think that's one of the reasons people are less afraid of trying new stuff. So much of the advance in quality for lower priced optics is so recent, that a newer product/company is on a good part of the curve in terms of their quality/value ratio.

Accordingly, people are having good experiences with newer, lower priced products and confidence is high that a new product will perform well.

Some of the more established optical companies may be having a harder time changing as quickly as they need to since the older/more established/more invested/more entrenched one is, the harder it is to change.

Just my $.02...

DJ

No they aren't. It's not even all that close. They aren't bad optics, or a waste of money, but, the big three they ain't.

Magnumdood,

According to the guy who compared my 13X56 Minox with his 10X42 Swaro, you are mistaken. He said he could not tell any difference. He paid $1,400 for the Swaro because they were on sale; reduce from $1,800. He went on to say if he had seen these first, he would have purchased them instead of the Swaros.

So it looks like two against one here, my .com friend.

Just rummer from relative in Germany three times removed so they may know squat there take is the big three feel like GM with a hole lot of Honda's on the butt. And we all know how that played out.

Best Alan

It would be interesting for doug to comment on vortex, he has seen um come and go over the years,

Just for an example, looking at an 8x43 sized binocular from the Big 3 right now puts you at the following prices...Swaro $2,399...Zeiss $2249....Leica $2099. These prices in the current economy are absolutely ridiculous IMO, if you even remotely evaluate what you are getting for those prices.You cant even say that a midrange bino compares, because the mid range is no longer the midrange, its now the 1/4 or 25% range of what Big 3 binos cost. Unless you just plain have more money than you know what to do with, a fella has to do some thinking before buying. Minox, Pentax, Vortex,Nikon has obviously filled the massive void between what was once known as midrange binos while the Big 3 price themselves right out of the game. Its really kind of funny, Dougs Demo prices on Big 3 glass are in some cases higher than what the Big 3 glass used to cost new 2 years ago, and its clear that Douogs demo prices are the best around. It will be interesting to see what happens with Big 3 sales numbers in the coming years!

Okay!

Collect your prize at the door.

(Do you think him being your friend might have influenced the dialog even a little bit?)

Minox are good, but Swarovski they ain't!..

Magnumdood,

We ain't even friends. He is my friend's brother. And I never even met the guy. But thanks for the prize. I will turn it in on next year's taxes.

+1 guys. It seems some people on the 'fire are made of money. I feel that there many products out there that offer very good bang for the buck and much of what the Big 3 offer is snob appeal(mine is more expensive than yours or very marginally better). I read in a magazine some time ago that Leica could sell there products for less but choose to market for a certain "clientele." I have used "less expensive" hell down right cheap optics over the years. Some I am still using years later with no problem. I didn't buy these at the time because they were cheap but it was what I could afford. The great thing about today is that there are many great products which are AFFORDABLE for the average Joe. You don't have to hunt with a $35 optic because you can't afford a $2000 one.

Gotta hunch that for each person here that are happy as clams talking about their Swaro, S&B and Zeiss goodies, there are probably 100 other members who "make do" with less stellar optics?

I see a few of the top shelf scopes at our ranges and have yet to meet one of those shooters that complained about his scope, or how much it cost. Almost to a man, they're more likely to cackle about how great their scopes are and what they cost, generally to the point of annoying those sharing the range.

To each their own.

Although we did have a member that drove a new Mercedes two seater and owned lots of pricey rifles, who once complained that he had to spend money on a sight adjusting tool for his new HK. He thought for that kind of money, the sight tool should've been included.

Naturally, I tried to empathize with the guy.

The only Zeiss I have is the <$400 3-9x40 Conquest and I don't think it qualifies in the "snob appeal" department.

Damn fine scope though!

Hensoldt 6-24x72.

Very snobish.

Also an optic that's a pleasure to use and doubles as my spotter.

Dood, you have to post a pic of that scope and the rifle it's mounted on!

Don't think I've ever seen a scope with a 72mm objective, let alone mounted on a rifle!

I've gotta agree with this. Ten years I bought a pair of 10x42 slc's, brand new $830 delivered to my door. I almost crapped when I paid the credit card bill because I never thought I'd pay that much for a pair of binoculars, but they've been wonderful and worth every penny. I haven't felt that constant need to upgrade that you get from buying 2nd tier equipment. Fast forward ten years and the same binos are twice the price. I know my purchasing power hasn't doubled. The prices of the alpha binos are completely out of control, I just can't see myself paying $2300 for a pair of binos. Vortex is attempting to fill a niche opened between the bottom tier junk and the alphas, a niche that was opened by the prices of the alphas skyrocketing. I'm glad they're attempting to fill this niche, competition is good and hopefully that competition will jerk a knot in zeiss, swaro, and leica to get them to price their products more competitively. Fortunately for me, I have a top notch pair of binos already and I'm not a optics collector, I don't feel the need to own five different sizes of binos and constantly buy and sell.

That being said, I looked at the prices of the vortex line and some of their stuff costs more than what I paid for a swaro ten years ago. I'd have a real hard time paying close to a grand for a pair of chinese made binos from a company without a lot of history. I know nothing of vortex quality and am not bashing them, but just the thought of spending huge sums of money on the latest unknown fad kind of bothers me. I've gotten burned on a couple of scopes by buying into the latest internet discussion board wonder product only to find out that they didn't live up to the hype. I'm just glad that I'm not looking to buy optics right now, the selection out there right now is great but the prices are just obscene.

I'll present you with a completely different observation. Competition shooters throughout history have driven accuracy innovations. I've heard the military has repeatedly looked to competition shooters for innovations. Target shooters have driven the accuracy game. The best out there, ones I've talked to and read about... are all talking about March scopes. Those who can afford them have them.

They are stupid expensive, carry a 1 year warranty and have to be sent back to Japan if they break. Kelby's is the only dealer in the US and people are buying them. Why? They are the sharpest clearest scopes out there, and mechanically built like a Swiss watch.

People looking for an edge are buying them. They're an unproven company, but they're building what a lot of folks consider a top product... with a premium price. I'd have one of their 60X benchrest scopes if I had $2100 for one.

Check out the benchrest pics.

http://www.deon.co.jp/march/menu2_5.htm

I can't comment on the quality of the product. However when they first hit the scene it seemed like they were paying people on various websites (other than this one) to just monitor websites and jump on anything optic related and it got to the point of being spam. I don't know if they were just really really loyal customers or paid shill. Put a bad taste in my mouth.

Are all of Vortex's models Chinese made?

The Fury series downward are Chinese. The Viper, Razor, and Kaibab are Japanese. Vortex designs the glass in their Wisconsin facility (one of the owners is a design engineer). They then contract with whatever manufacturer will give them what they want in the final product. I think they use three Chinese factories and two Japanese.

Thanks Steve, that's what I had thought.

In this day and age that seems to be the only profitable avenue to an upstart optics company. The tooling and expertise to produce your own products from scratch would be astronomical compared to farming out the work to one of the existing overseas optics factories.
One of the few exceptions would be a case like Meopta importing their own parts for their new MeoPros to be assembled here in the states.

The exact reason I haven't purchased any Votex Optics.

Fact is while Vortex might be a young company, Eagle Optics is not. Vortex is basically the hunting side of EO. EO is well known in the birding world and I assume they wanted to create a little distance between the two brands to not upset the bunny-huggers. I'd put my trust in Vortex based on my experience with EO's products.

One of the reasons alphas are so expensive is the ability to do a binocular from scratch, where you do everything in house. Some aspects are probably not as efficient as others. I suppose some things are farmed out, how much or what, I don't know. The thing is a lot of facets of binocular production could be sub-contracted and costs could come down. They are sort of in a corner there too. Imagine the outcry if some asian glass components or housings started to show up in Swarovski, Zeiss, or Leica binoculars.

As has already pointed out, the owners of Vortex seem to have quite a bit of experience in the optic industry. In addition, many of the Asian optics manufacturers (likely including some of those manufacturing the upper end Vortex products) have been producing quality optics for many, many years.
Perhaps it would be of benefit to the consumer to be informed of the history of the actual Asian manufacturer, but the large majority of consumers don't have much of a desire for that information. It's pretty much the same song and dance with many American products. We know they are made overseas, but nobody wants to talk about the details much.

To put it in perspective, Vortex binos have been on the market for quite some time now yet how many durablitity/breakage issues have you seen or heard of? They seem to be a quality made product.
As I pointed out eariler, with the top-notch warranty they carry, there wouldn't be much cause for concern for me personally.

It's hard for people to accept new as being as good or better. many feel that way because they over paid for a product or are stuck in the mentality that the more you pay for something the better it is.
I am sorry to say but the Swaro's I paid $1800 for a few years ago is the same Swaro's being sold today for $2200. So what has changed? Same bino same everything just a bigger price tag. Hell I feel screwed hearing Dennis paid $1400 for the same bins I paid $1800 for. I'd feel even worse if I paid $2200 for them. Same product for a higher price is a rip so I look for something more in my price range. If I were rich I might still be frugal and still buy Vortex or Minox or Nikon because they are that good. Maybe Vortex more thatn the other due to their warrantee. What's funny is this warrantee thing. You know Vortex makes darn good stuff if they have a warrantee like that. I mean the company would go broke if they made junk because they'd lose money on handing out replacements. So that says something for a company.
The hunting industry in general has outpriced the middle class. Everything is so expensive.
Good thing we have companies willing to try and produce quality stuff that is comparable to the best at affordable prices. If they didn't people would be stuck replacing junk year after year.
As much as you guys hate to face the fact the fact is new companies are coming out and making new stuff just as good or better than the top names.
The hype is real and vortex is the real deal. New fact to add to the fact sheet here is: Great binoculars are not just made in Europe or are made by companies a zillion years old.

Kique

MagDude, can you give me some examples of why you have stated this? Which models of each are you comparing?

"close" is a matter of opinion.
In mine, being with 10% or so of the same optical quality is pretty darn close and should only be separated by the same percentage dollar wise.

Not knocking Alpha glass at all. As a matter of fact, I just held up a set of EL's the other day and they are a quality piece. Smooth as butter. But are they worth 2 to 4 times the price of several others in the case that I compared them to? To me they are not.

My Vortex Razors in 10x42 are an outstanding bino by any standard. I have run them against my friend's Leica Geovids and can see no difference in them glassing across canyons in west Texas for Auodad.

The three Vortex Crossfire 3x9 by 40 scopes on my rifles have worked and worked well and given no problems for the 18 months I have had them. I paid a screaming 149 bucks apiece for them, lighted reticle and all, and I frankly don't need more scope on a Model 70.

To me, Vortex is most certainly not about hype. They have given me a lot of value and performance for the money I spent on their products.

Encouraging words of experience.

The obligitory response would be:

"Yeah....but just wait until the day they all fail on you....sometime....maybe....then you'll be really sorry you saved $5000+ on optics!!"

wink-wink.

Wouldn't be sorry at all, he would just send them back for repair or replcement and have them back about 10 times faster than it would take his "alphas" to gett repaired and sent back.

Funny thing that is, if the alphas are so wonderful why with some of the alpha companys does it take what seems like forever and a day to could work done. I mean they are so reliable that they should have just a few pairs in the shop for repair, they should be able to get them out likety split, don't you think?

All that said, I carry Leica Ulravids, but I'm smart enough to know that I'm not whoopin' my buddies asses that carry Vipers and Razors just because I have the MIGHTY Leicas. In fact when I look through their top end Vortx products they carry I'm glad I got my Ultravids from Doug att a screaming low price, because otherwise I might feel like I really got screwed.

Bill

The reason is the quantum leap in technology. It used to take years to design a group of lenses to do a job but now with the modeling software and computer power available a company can design and test many models in a virtual reality before building a prototype. Look at the aircraft and missile industry.

Ill only add that I used Vortex Customer service once and was blown away with the treatment I got, I got a return phone call from someone who discussed my problem with me and explained what might be wrong with the product and instead of repairing it they sent me a brand new replacement. I sent the item in and got the phone call and received the new replacement within a week total! I may try one of their riflescopes now.

This has been an intersting thread;......Nothing sounds more appealing than the notion that a guy can get something for nothing,or said another way,that he can get equal quality for less money.

This is simply not so because the world is not made that way......somewhere along the line,if you pay less,you get less,whether in the materials,parts,assembly,lense quality ruggedness,durability,resolution,brightness.....something has to give,be a compromise,somewhere along the line;otherwise the intermediate product has to cost more at some point.

This is not to say that the less expensive item cannot be serviceable,cannot do a good job,and maybe when it comes to rifle scopes or binoculars,maybe last long enough and be serviceable enough,for those who maybe do not subject the item to as much abuse......but I find it interesting that,even in the wake of all the new technology,you do not see Special Forces,or CIA,or other elite professional shooters,pining for for Vortex or other Pacific Rim products,at least as far as I know....I have been wrong before.....

Manufacturers warranties are utterly meaningless to me....if an important optical instrument fails me ,in the field, I will send it back, get it fixed or replaced,and promptly dump it....if I am upset enough, I will throw it away on the spot,and never think twice what it costs.

And I will not buy that manufacturers product again.....to my way of thinking if the item does not perform,fails you at an important, critical juncture of a hunt,it is worthless,of no value whatsoever.....to my way of thinking it should not fail to do the things I bought it to do.

It is impossible to quantify gear performance based on theoretical percentages.....on a hunt, you can either see to aim or you can't.......the scope holds zero or it doesn't.....it takes the bumps and bruises or it breaks....the binocular either shows you the buck bedded a mile away,or it doesn't........whatever it costs.

Rant over and read what you want into it.....JMHO and YMMV

Bob, I can guarantee you that some Zeiss, Leica and Swaro have failed in the field. I myself had to send my Ultravid BRs in to Leica for a fix on the focus wheel, it took four and half months to get them back. I'm good friends with the optics nut, owner of my local sporting goods store, and he has told me he has had all three brands returned for repair, some were damaged, others simply failed one way or another. I sure wish Leica had responded the way I hear Vortex has. Now I am happy to report that Leica has cleaned up their act in the warranty department, but they aren't infallable.

In general I agree that there is no free lunch, but in this case there may be other reasons, such as lower overhead, lower production cost (Chinese versus German labor cost), saving on R&D cost by either reverse engineering a known design, or just using the latest CAD-CAM desgn process. None of those factors would necessarily lead to an inferior, less robust product.

Bob, you clearly have more money than some of us if you never have to think twice what it cost. Most folks, especially in these hard economic times don't have that luxery. I personally own a pair of Ultravids, and probably won't sell them, but I'm considereing a pair of the 7x36 Zen Rays to be my do everything bin.

John

I understand what you are saying but in todays world nothing is made perfect and I pretty much expect problems. If those problems occur Its nice to have good customer service to back it up. I have read where some people have had their $2000.00 Swarovskis develop problems and they sent them in to get them fixed by their exceptional customer service. I seriously doubt they just threw them away.

Good points I guess but I would still love to see a pair of Swaro's, Zeiss or Leica's hold up to being launched off the roof of a 4runner by accident put back together on the spot and work like before like my old Fujinon 15x60's did on a coues hunt in Sonora. They held up and I was able to finish the hunt with them. Best part at the time they cost half of what the Swaro's costs. So I feel I got what I paid for for less money and they did all if not more than optics costing twice as much.
I do believe you can get just as good or better for less money. Reason being I think a lot of the big three cost comes from the loss of value of the dollar compared to the Euro. If the dollar was as strong as a few years ago would the big three still be outragously priced? Probably not.
So as much as I think you bring up some good points I gotta sorta disagree.

I hope some of you guys that don't believe Vortex and Minox can be as good as Leupy and Zeiss don't read the review of the Minox rifle scopes. You guys probably wouldn't believe that a little mid level company could put out scopes like that.

Kique

nuguy, if a $2000 Swaro craps on a hunt, that's the last hunt it'll see with me....like I said,fix it, replace,then dump it.BTDT

I would never trust it again....

kikque, I never mentioned brand,cost,upper tier or anything similar....I have hunted and trusted some pretty intermediate grade optics and they served me well....

What I said applies to optics across the board,and we prove little with samples of one....

Good points Bobinh,

But I don't thinnk anyone ever said in this thread that the top end Vortex were optically equal to Ultravids, FL's, or SLC/EL. And I know that is not what I meant by my post.

Sure the alphas are a hair brighter/sharper, but I mean a friggin hair! Is a "hair" worth $800-$1200 more? And yes I carry Ultravids, my dad carrys Victory FL's and some of my hunting partners carry Razors and Vipers.

From what I've seen the Vortex and Minox ( I also own a pair of Minox) are very rugged, we don't wussy hunt. The one pair of Vipers are carried by one rough SOB. He carries them with the necksttrap around the saddle horn of his horse for miles, beatin' and bouncin'. They are still holding up well.

Everyone needs to remember even Swarovski, Leica, and Zeiss were "new" at one time too. I guesss if nobody had given them a chance, they wouldn't be here today.

By the way I'd put a Meopta up against ANY Alpha for durability.

Bill

Bob--I hear exactly where you are coming from. And I agree that if a critical piece of equipment fails, it certainly no longer warrants your confidence, even if it is repaired or replaced.

Based on that premise, I suppose I should not be using my THIRD Leica rangefinder, a CRF 1200. Leica stiffed the hell out of me on the warranty of the previous units, but I had to have a rangefinder superior to the Nikon and Bushnell models that were available, and the Zeiss was not on the market at that time. Hence my continued use of the third Leica. Now we have a "new era" of customer service from Leica, and the national service manager is assuring us that things will be taken care of now and forever more. Are we supposed to believe this just because Leica is an Alpha company? Addressing current and future problems is one thing but atoning for past sins is apparently not in the business model. Alpha company or not, I have been had by them and they will not get another crack at me.

Vortex, on the other hand, is not considered to be in the Alpha class. Yet they have delivered FIRST RATE products to me that have needed NO SERVICE whatever and they have done it at significantly less cost than other brands that provide comprable performance. They have won my confidence and I will continue to use them without apology. Vortex is not about hype as they deliver value as well as performance. I just wish they made a laser rangefinder.

The point I'm trying to make and I guess should have said to begin with is the Big Three are now grossly overpriced. If Fl/Ultravid/EL cost $1400 or so (which is all their worth) I would tell everyone to save their money and buy them.

But at over 2k they have not only reached the point of diminishing returns, they have passed it.

Bill

They seem to make something to fit everyone's need...they have a lot of products for a new company. They listen to the public well so I wouldn't be surprised if they make rangefinders next year.

It isn't hype if they back it up.

Companies like Vortex or Zen Ray will get my business. Would love a pair of Swaros, but can't afford them.

.

I've a notion which brand(s) you're referring to, but would you mind spilling the beans?

Bob- I don't think the Asian optics on the market are quite to the level of the Europeans yet, and I don't believe anyone is making that claim, but it's not because they can't do it, it's simply because no one has asked them to yet. Put a set of Zen glass in a nicer made housing with a bit smoother gearing and a tad tigher tolerances and you'll have an Alpha equal for less than half the price that will last every bit as long. I'd be willing to guess we'll see something along those lines sooner rather than later.

Here's some food for thought: If you were to secretly put some Zen ED2 glass in a new Leica or Zeiss housing with a new Leica or Zeiss model name on it and show it around at the next trade show, what do you think the reaction would be?

The reaction would be.............."Wow these are frickin great......"

I have a deployed buddy who asked me to find him a good deal on a spotter. On dougs reccomendation I purchased the Vortex Skyline 20-60 spotter. After checking out the new spotter after it arrived I bought the same one for myself to replace my Kowa which had been stolen a few years ago. I found it to be every bit the equal in optical quality. I have been using it for 4 months now at the range aqnd I am extremely satisfied with it.

Its funny how these discussions on optics always seem to end up the same way.

Nuts and bolts, it doesnt matter what everybody else says about glass. All that matters is if you can find what your looking for when looking through whatever you decide to purchase. I've been guiding hunts for almost 20 years and in the majority of cases I've found that the most expensive binoculars wont make a guy find more deer. Its funny when one of my Mexican trackers with binoculars that cost $30 at Wal Mart 10 years ago out spots guys with $2000 alpha glass on a consistant basis. It happens ALL THE TIME

So, in my experience, the Vortex Kaibabs are a better buy than the Swarovski 15x binos. I have spent so damn many hours behind both that its not even funny and I prefer the Vortex. It fits my eyes better, its just as clear to me and its more that half the cost. Only time will tell if they are as tough but with the warranty thats offered from Vortex I'm not worried about it.

I am tough on equipment and have sent my Swarovskis back to the factory on average of once every 3 years. I will see how the Vortex hold up. So far so good.

Finally, have a Leica Televid spotting scope, a pair of 10x Swarovskis and a pair of 10's and 15's from Vortex. They are all nice. If you dont like Vortex then dont buy em but to bash them with little to no experience with them is simply ignorant. I especially like the stories where a guy that doesnt like something just happened to look through it once.

Drummond

Also, I live in northern CO, anybody that wants to go out and look through them just let me know and we'll go look at a few bucks and bulls close to the house here

It should happen ALL THE TIME. You�re a guide operating a guide service and your Mexican Trackers LIVE there and could out- spot the vast majority of people with two toilet paper rolls taped together...it's their home turf. They do it all the time; they know where the deer are; they know what to look for; they probably don't really need the glass. Spotting isn�t simply sticking a nice set of binos up to your face and look for a deer standing broadside 10 yards from the wood line. Better glass means less eye fatigue, better color differentiation (brown leaves or brown fur?), better depth differentiation, etc, etc, etc�. If your Mexican Trackers couldn�t out�spot the large majority of hunters you�d need some new Mexican Trackers.

Obviously the point I was trying to make missed its mark, you must have read my post through a set of Vortex glasses


You said in a previous post...


Not even close? Thats just a rediculous statement to make IMO. I think I saw where you were making your assessment based on one experience with a Vortex Razor spotter? Maybe I'm wrong but I was under the impression that this is what you said. Have you looked through the Kaibabs? If so, how many hours and under what conditions were you able to assess them? How about the Swarovski 15x's? Same question, what kind of conditions and how many hours? I'm not trying to be a horses behind but I have been blessed to spend hundreds, if not thousands of hours behind the binoculars in question and I can tell you that for the money and for what I need the Vortex is a better buy. The quality of the view through the Kaibabs are VERY close to that of the Swarovski.

Maybe I am not the right guy to compare these glasses, I have been blessed by the good Lord with great eyesight. Maybe a guy with contacts or glasses would have a different perspective but to me the 2 binoculars are optically very close

This thread makes me think of one of my hunters from California. He is the best shot of any of the hunters I've ever hunted with. He shoots an old 30-06 with a Weaver scope and I have never seen him miss a shot and some were just rediculous. His setup isnt very expensive but for him it works the best. I was out in California about 10 years ago and watched him win a skeet shoot with an old beat up pump shotgun. I wish I had a camera to capture the looks he got when he walked up and when he left, the facial expressions were priceless. Those guys just couldnt imagine how a guy with a $200 setup could outshoot them with shotguns that cost God knows how much. The point that I have been trying to make is that sometimes the most expensive piece of equipment doesnt always work the best and that the individual operating the equipment has a lot to do with the outcome.

Look, I get it, you read about Vortex on some sniper forum on the internet so you went out and used it for a bit. In your opinion they dont compare to "the big 3" as you put it. Awesome outcomes data there! If you dont like em dont buy em. For me, I'll take my experience and the experience of guys like Enrique that have literally used and compared apples to apples in optics for years in all sorts of conditions and I will make an educated decision. To me, its an easy decision to make. It is funny that on internet forums you will hear people talk down or speak poorly about the Vortex brand but the majority of the guys that I know and trust in the hunting industry that have spent some time with the Vortex brand have great things to say. None of us drank the marketing Kool-aid or got paid to sit in a circle, sing koombaya and praise the almighty Vortex, we just genuinely like the product we looked through.

Drummond

Scott, that's a fair statement,and may really be my only point..... something has to be scarificed for less money is all I'm saying...and in case I did not make myself clear,this does not always mean that what we leave on the table is important.....

Heck I've killed the overwhelming majority of stuff with lowly 4X Leupolds,mostly out of shear stubborness,and because younger eyes and tons of practice allowed me to make it work,but mostly because the things have been utterly reliable for me........at the same time I was doing this,I had a bin made by one of the big 3 hanging around my neck....so in the end I am not a real optics snob; and I knew there were better scopes out there all along......advancing age is making me change my tune a bit now,because I simply see better now through more expensive stuff....even a curmudgeon can ignore the improvements only so long.....

I can't say what the reaction would be with Zen Ray glass in a Zeiss or Leica housing,since I have never even seen a Zen binocular.....likely,at first glance,we may be fooled....but I bet the price point would be different then,too

I have to laugh every time I read this!!

Why do so many military and law enforcement organizations use S&B these days? Why not Vortex? or gasp Leupold so much anymore? I am not sure many use Zeiss or Swaro either.

338rcm: You find that humorous why? Tell me what you have owned...and used?

Just curious....

I think we put to mush emphasis on price tag the cost of production is just high in Europe not always meaning higher quality mostly wages. And Asia is embracing new technology CNC everything not to say Europe isn't but Asia seem to have it mastered at a lower cost. So a price tag today has much less to do with quality then just a few years ago.

Just how I see it.
Best Alan

A Mazak CNC mill with a good operator hold just as tight of tolerances whether it is located in China or in Germany.

nsaqam no argument there! Just in China cost is less.

Best Alan

Obviously you've never hunted in Sonora. Deer are thinly dispersed over vast, vast areas, so there is no way to know exactly where the deer are. Also the cover is very, very thick so optics are a necessity. It's a very valid point huntsonora is making. Having experienced it myself a few times I totally understand.

You both ignored my point which is just as valid.

We have a Mexican Standoff.

This brings to mind a counterpoint I think needs to be made. The issue of low labor costs in China as a contributing factor in less expensive Chinese glass is brough up continually. The flip side is that wages to the people who assemble the Euro glass are as exorbitantly as high as the Chinese are low. What percentage of each goes to the design, manufacture, and hardware and what is the labor percentage? So that begs the question of what are relative portion of the costs of each if labor is factored out? Is a a Swaro 90% labor, 75%, 50%...what? Is the labor cost of a Chinese binocular 25%, 50%...what?

I realize the OP titled the post to Vortex, but anybody who does not thing the ZR/Vortex glass can amount to much really needs to do themselves a favor and buy one (even if you return for a refund) and look for yourself.

Ok pumpkin, if it makes you feel any better I'll just say that you are right, the Mexican trackers should absolutely spot the vast majority of the deer

That being said, they had both hands and feet bound behind their backs, were gagged and essentially blindfolded by the equipment they were using if you were to compare their no-name brands to that of the "big 3".

I dont get your arguement at all. I also noticed that after I posted the last time at around 11:45 last night and all but quoted you on your use, or lack thereof, of the Vortex brand you went back 45 minutes later and deleted the post where you basically admitted your very limited use of only one of their products and gave the reason of "not useful information". It was useful to anybody that wanted to make an educated decision and not just take the word of some internet forum cowboy that has little to no knowledge of what he was comparing. Yeah dude, your a freaking expert

Anyway, this whole thread is rediculous, if your looking to buy optics you need to go to a place where you can look through the different optics your thinking about buying. What works for one wont work for all but go in with an open mind and you may save a few dollars on a product that will be awfully damn close to another thats priced way higher.

See, that really wasnt a "Mexican Standoff", I've found that anytime somebody brings a knife to a gunfight its really not a standoff

Drummond

I think the names "Vortex" and "Viper" are a mistake. Sounds cheesy.

Can't speak to Vortex. Sure like my Chinese Minox though.

Its not cause they see better. How long do you actually look through a riflescope?
Most people believe the added cost for the premo optics is reliability and dependability

Why do so many military and law enforcement organizations use S&B these days? Why not Vortex? or gasp Leupold so much anymore? I am not sure many use Zeiss or Swaro either. [/quote]

Nearly every optics company makes better quality glass nowdays. The higher price tag usually means better dependability and reliability.
Bob I have owned optics from nearly all major companies including Ziess (classis conquest and Victory) Swaro (SLC 10x42 and 8x30)Bushnell Elite, Burris Signature,Minox (HG 8x33 8x43)Kahles (8 and 10x42)and countless others in the mid priced range.Never have owned any Leica optics.
My favorite pair now is a pair of 8x32 binoculars I bought on ebay for $29.95. Ever heard of Shirstone brand?, To my eyes they are almost on the same level as the 8x30 SLCs.

yeah...

Thanks sugarplumb�admitting you�re wrong is a big step.



I posted that because I don�t want to dump on Vortex, but noooo, you had to be an azzhat and bring it back in. Fine. There�s a thread on Sniper�s Hide, accompanied by pictures, that shows the image of a Vortex Razor scope, the Flagship of their scope line , the end-all, be-all of scopes. The OP reported that no matter where he placed his head a shadowing impinged on the field of view. When he moved his head to get rid of it, it simply moved to the other side of the image. Vortex wants 2K$ for something even Barfska can do and they can�t? I don�t think so. Now that the �Boretex Hype� has burned out, I don�t see any threads about them save this one.



That depends on if you really know how to use your blade. That�s a moot point too. My G20 is never far away and my knives are always with me. It�s a Mexican Standoff.

338.well I am not gonna argue with what you see,but your eyes must be a hell of a lot better than mine!

Very diplomatic.

Terry

Thats the difference between you and I, I dont need to go to some forum and look at shiny pictures and get one persons opinion to be able to form my own opinions. I will actually go out and use equipment and form my own opinions based on that.

You say that you edited that post because you didnt want to dump on Vortex but thats all you've really done in this entire thread so why would you have just edited one post? We both know why, I mentioned it earlier, you simply look like a fool because you basically admitted in that post that you have looked through one Vortex scope once or twice. You were called on it, realized that people were paying attention and you didnt like it so you edited it claiming it "wasnt useful information". I guarantee you it was useful to anybody that was really wanting to research a quality product.

So, eye on the ball here cause I dont want to ask a third time, how many hours have you spent behind Vortex Kaibabs and under what kind of conditions(light, temp, moisture, etc..) and how many hours have you spent behind the Swarovski 15x56 binos and under what kind of conditions? This is a valid question. You tell me and people that have my same opinion that Vortex "isnt even close" to that of Swarovski and if you added up all the hours we've spent behind these optice it would add up to weeks, if not months of our lives. Your basically calling us out for having this opinion and your best experience, as near as I can tell, is reading another dudes post over on Snipers Hide forum. Dude, seriously? You dont think you've brought a knife to a gunfight withy that sort of information? I dont know whats worse, the fact that you think you have enough experience to be able to make an educated decision or the passive agressive way you slam �Boretex� and anybody that posts positive experiences with them.



This quote alone just reaks of immaturity. I can tell just by how you carry yourself on an internet forum that your a bad, bad man!

Drummond

I've yet to see anything he's shot either. Course he is in Illanoise.

Funny how folks jump on E for not using something and commenting, oh well lots of silly [bleep] around here.

Nice to see you get the point.

Eye on the ball here Drummond; I'm done with this thread. I tried to bow out once, and you pulled me back in. It won't happen again.

Which part was you trying to bow out? The part where you called me an "azzhat" in your last post or was it the part where you called Vortex �Boretex� ? Oh wait, how could I have missed it, it was the part where you asked me how well I knew my "blade" and told me that your G20 was "never far away" and that you always had you knives with you. BTW, that was probably the gayest thing I have ever read on a forum.

Since you wont answer the question about how much actual experience you have with Vortex you can do one of two things. First, you can actually go out and try a pair and really use them and form an opinion yourself or secondly, you go go polish up your vast knowledge by reading a few more reviews that others have written and try to pawn them off as your own again, I really dont care.

If your ever out in Colorado look me up, I'm more than happy to take you up on the hill so you can actually look through a pair of the optics you've been trashing. I'll even let you do a side by side comparison with the Swarovskis

Drummond

huntsonora

Your posts are all right on. The OBSERVING is the most important part of using optics. Mule Deer has often alluded to this in his writings on glassing. The well disciplined and trained observer will always trump the equipment. Instead of spending $2k bucks on a pair of binoculars, we ought to pay your Mexican trackers $2k bucks to teach us how to SEE game, then the optics wouldn't make much difference. It never ceases to amaze me how we delude ourselves into believing that we simply need to spend more money to make our equipment better. Kudos to your 30-06 shooter with the Weaver scope. "Beware the man with a single rifle, he probably knows how to use it"

Beware the man with the Wally World binoculars, he may know how to use them.

Anyone knocking the Kaibab's obviously hasn't had their hands on a pair! Damn good glass and they're built as tough as anything out there, plus Vortex's warranty is second to none!

If yall ever see this guy walking into a skeet shoot with a beat up pump shotgun dont enter the competition. Thought you'd like to see the 30.06 that he shoots...



Another view of his net record book typical

I remember seeing the picture/story in a magazine Drummond. Great buck for sure. Guys with old hunting guns are usually deadly, just like guys who putt with old putters. They usually know what they're doing.

Nice buck!

I'll take this pair



Over a pair that doesnt know how to glass even though they have a pair of these...


Although I have to admit, sometimes you just dont care what they're looking through, the view is still great!


I have to admit, wouldnt matter what binoculars she was using, her eyesight obviously sucks if shes hanging out with me

Drummond

And while I'm at it, I'll post a few Vortex shots

When I'm up here



Looking at stuff like this



I use these



Like this



To find bucks like this





If I were able to find this 200" deer with Vortex it makes me wonder how big of a buck I could have found with Swarovski! Damnit, I knew I should have spent twice as much!

All kidding aside, I'm not telling everybody here to run out and buy only Vortex, I am telling you all to give them an honest chance and if you go in with an open mind you may just find yourself saving a quite a few dollars to be able to spend on another piece of equipment. The Kaibabs have been great to me!

Magnumdood, no hard feelings. I wasnt going to call anybody in particular out until you singled me out and to be honest, you can trash me all you want but trashing my guys in Mexico are fighting words Swarovski, Zeiss and Leica are all great, I own different pieces of all 3 brands but I do love the Vortex Kaibabs. If your ever out this way look me up. I'll buy you lunch and we'll go look at some country

Drummond

It'd be worth a trip to Colorado just to see her in person!...

Come on out! She obviously isnt a very good judge of character if shes hanging out with me!

Shes a keeper though, not only does she look great and put up with my ugly arse




She also doesnt mind dead stuff! Heres a cougar with a cougar



Sorry for the thread hijack

Drummond

If you're gonna hijack a thread, that's the proper way to do it!

Great pics in every respect Drummond.

Standby, Magnumdood might be able to find a picture of a squirrel he shot in 1983.

What an animal! The girl is a real cutie too

Terry

TFF!!!

Drummond you married up, some of us get lucky like that

Great pics.

Not trying to be funny here but was he even born in 1983? I figured he was just a kid

Drummond

Oh no! Just dating up. I have no plans to get married. That's another cool thing about her though, so far there's been no pressure.

Drummond

Even better

Smart man.....

+1 on that!

Cougar with a Cougar... hehe. You're alright!

huntsonora
Thanks for the pics, great mulie.

You betcha!

Drum

24 years in the optics business is a child? Sheltered Wings/Eagle Optics/Vortex is a proven commodity in the optics industry. One's ignorance shows when making such statements.

Good point. I haven't seen too many people concerned about the new Redfields: it seems the track record of the company behind them is good enough. Likewise, Eagle Optics seems to have proven themselves both before, and since, the Vortex launch.

I liked the reports about the company enough to have my eyes evaluate the product. It seems like there are a decent % of buyers out of the pool who've actually seen/used the Vortex products for themselves.

As always, use whatever you want. But try to refrain from trashing what you've not tried.

FC

One thing I haven't seen here is how long the OEM has been in business that makes the bino's (and scopes/spotters) for these various companies. Some have been producing optics for a very long time. For example, Light Optical Works has been in business since 1956.

Perhaps a statement made by someone who has never used Nikon Venturer LX, Premier LX or HG L binoculars.

Sounds like the Nikon EDG would also make that list.

Had to check out the "Vortex Hype" for myself. Purchased a pair of 8x42 Vipers from another member here on the Fire.Got them in the mail this afternoon. To late when I got home to check out the optics, but the build construction looks great. Nice case lens covers and strap. One of the first things I noticed is on most Japanese binos the lens have a greenish tent to them. The Vipers are more of a goldish looking color to me. somewhat similar to the Swaros color. I should have some time in the next few days to get them outside and check out the view.

I am still astonished by the folks who believe that Europe will always be ahead of "those new Asian optics."

The technology of optics (indeed anything) has been spread around the world for decades. Canon and Nikon have been the cameras of choice for most professionals for 20+ years. Bird-watchers (who use optics as their primary tools) rate many Asian optics as good as anything else. Yet somehow among hunters any binocular or riflescope made anywhere except Germany or Austria is second-class.

Eagle/Vortex was always ahead of the curve.

Oh come-on JB, You know the more you spend the better you can see!!!
LOL!!!

Some will "see" better before they even look through them.

Thanks Mule Deer, A light in the wilderness. I guess seeing is believing.

What does Mule Deer know anyways ;^)

He has only been writing on optics in magazines and books for many, many years.

By the way, I based my first alpha bino purchase in 1999 on an article that John wrote about 15 years ago. It was an article obviously about bino's and in it he had a section talking about hunters being obsessed with power. There was a section in it where he described an experiment where one of his friends in a major European optics company did an experiment where he took identical size optics that had a 8x and 7x models. The guy covered up the power ratings on the bino's with tape and had a bunch of staff look through them and say which one they preferred. Well as you probably guessed the over whelming majority picked the 7x.

At the time I was trying to decide about getting the 7x30 or the 8x30 Swarovski SLC's. I picked the 7x's after doing some experiments of my own before buying them and to this day I am still thrilled with the 7x30 Swarovski SLC's. They are great for bowhunting.

As another side note regarding the Vortex Hype-I recently picked up a pair of Vortex 6x32 Vipers and to tell you the truth optics have come a long way and there is no hype at all on these. I know that I was comparing a New pair of Vipers with an 11 year old SLC, but the 6x32 Vipers do not take a back seat to the Swarovski SLC's in any measure of optic qualities. The 6x32 Vipers are simply fantastic; -bright, clear vivid color, great contrast; resolution and a pleasure to use as far as ergonomics go. I do use 8x and 10x at times, but I use lower power bino's for most of my hunting. I am not going to be giving up the Swarovski 7x30 SLC's, but I can see myself using these 6x32 Vipers for most of my hunting and not feel under gunned in any way (optics or power).

I sure do love the "Hype" that's been on this thread! Doug will be getting my order for the 12x50 Diamondbacks this weekend, and it will be due in no small part to the EXPERIENCED posts on this thread!

Just one observation... I've noticed that how long a company has "been around" has been a major deal-breaker for some, yet these same folks wouldn't even sneeze in the direction of say a Tasco or Bushnell who've been in business for decades. Reputations are earned no matter how long it took to establish them, and the reputations of the Vortex lines seem well supported and stellar!

This is good info here, I have a pair of these 6x32's on the way to me as we speak. My understanding is that they are at the top of this class of bins.

fwiw,
I don't pay to do beta testing. Those that do, and share, are greatly appreciated...

Regards, Matt.

fwiw,
I don't believe Asian Optics will "always" be behind German Optics. It's just that they've always been "second class" and continue to be... That may change, however, up until this point it has not. Performance speaks louder than any pundit...imho

Regards, Matt.

In your mind

He is special...

Alaska Cub,

I think that you will be really impressed by the Viper 6x32's. They are great; better than the Leupold Katmai's 6x32's by a noticeable margin when I tried them side by side. The Vipers compare well to the 7x30 SLC's that I have; also they did very well in a comparison that I did with the venerable 8x32 Nikon SE's. They certainly have to be top of the 6x32 class (even though it is a very small class).

To Matt above who seems to have an unfavorable opinion of Asian glass:

"It's just that they've always been "second class" and continue to be..."

Well have you ever down a close comparison with the Nikon 8x32 SE's and ANY 8x32 from any maker (Europe or otherwise)? Because I think if you did you would find out that all the "pundits" are not wrong when they say that optically the SE's may be the best 8x32 binocular ever made. Like you said above- "Performance speaks louder than any pundit..imho"
And in this case you are just another pundit like the rest of us; but, by the way,- in the case of the Nikon SE's the performance does speak very loud.

Not so sure if I agree with that statement. It could be argued that asian optics such as the Nikon EDG are already Alpha glass that only lag behind in perception due to not actual being produced in Europe.

As I've stated before, it seems the only reason that most other Asian optics have been behind the Europeans in overall quality is because that's the market share the large majority of them have been asked to produce. If a company beckons them to come out with a top-level bino and has the capital to fund it, they could surely produce it. They have already shown the ability to create a glass on par with the Euro Alphas (Chinese ED), now all they need to do is come up with a housing and mechanics to match. The Chinese could likely produce a similar quality housing as the Nikon EDG to go with their ED glass for much less money. It's only a matter of time imho.

I agree with what you have stated. Anyone who thinks that the Japanese are not capable of producing sport optics on par with any of the euro makers is very mis-informed. Heck, even the current Elite bino's from Bushy are very close and cost less than half of what the top dogs are charging these days.

The Elite's are great, and the list goes on.........
Nikon EDG
Kowa Prominar
Nikon LXL premier
Nikon SE
Kowa Genesis binos
Vortex Razor spotter
Nikon ED Fieldscopes

To say the asian glass is "second class" is laughable.

"To say the asian glass is "second class" is laughable."

As Eremicus would say........That's funny....

Got em today and got a chance to go outside and play with em a bit. I am very impressed from initial impressions. They are just about the perfect size, come with sweet objective caps similar to the Leica's, feel good in the hands and are pleasant on the eyes. The glass is excellent, very bright, and crystal clear. Will give em a good go around here soon.

Please elaborate as I would love to hear which binoculars you have compared recently.

Performance does speak louder than pundits, it also speaks louder than guys on internet forums which is why I tried and compared the Vortex Kaibabs to the Swarovskis and ended up buying the Kaibabs.

I look forward to hearing more about your comparisons

Drummond

One persons great binos look like crap to another person.My friend has vortex binos said they were great and I should get some so we put them next to my Zeiss there was NOTHING even close to good about vortex when put next to Zeiss but if your just wanting binos you can hunt with and throw around I dont see what could be wrong with buying some I would let my kid play with them if I bought them.

Thats the same reaction I had when I compared a pair of Razor 8x42's to my Ultravid 8x42's, but I think my mind would not accept that I had paid 3 times as much as the guy did with the Razors, so there was no way I was gonna say ....man those are good! Its a safety mechanism in the brain, to keep you feeling good about the things you spend lots of money on!....grin

This begs the question which Vortex and which Zeiss?

Vortex Crossfire vs. Zeiss FL is one thing, Vortex Razor vs. Zeiss Conquest is another.

As I see it ,there are two kinds of optics "pundits"..

There are guys Like John Barsness who have been writing and reviewing optics from ALL the major companies for over a genration. Men who have been SOUGHT OUT by those same companies for HONEST and thoughful reviews. Men who hunt and write proffesionally and have litterally WRITTEN THE BOOK on the subject.

Then there are the feable minded brand snobs on 'net forums like Matt here who critsize anyone DARES to make a comment that challenges their ignorant veiwpoints..

Dude, for at LEAST a generation now the Japanese have proven they can make optics that run with ANYTHING the Germans or Austrians can make at about 2/3rds of the price. It's a damn shame you don't have the actual experience to match your arrogance.

You don't know a [bleep]ing thing about Matt Garrett. I'd wager he has as much time behind binos and rifle scopes as you...probably more. I'd trust Matt's opinion as much as Mr. Barsness, and both more than you. Mr. Barsness noted that not one Japanese-glass Loopy Scope matched any S&B scope. Not a single [bleep]ing Then there's Mr. Barsness's comprehensive review of riflescopes; #1 S&B, #2. Swarovski. I don't see any "asian glass" in the lead in either test.

And then you have the two posters above you comparing Vortex to Zeiss (snicker), and Leica (snicker). Again, the jap glass came in a distant second. As Matt said,

Damn, I thought this Voretex thread died a quiet death.

Magnum dude..


The best "Japanese glass" I was reffering to was NOT Vortex.

Where are the March scopes made?

Ever compare any of those head to head with German glass?

And BTW,GFYS..

Just for a little extra information, I finally tested a Leupold VX-7, something I had been meaning to do for a while but hadn't gotten around to. The scope was a 2.5-10x45, and the optics are right in there with S&B, Swarovski and Leica. I would still rate them slightly behind S&B, but only by a whisker, and very similar to Swarovski Z6 and the new Leica scopes.

John..

Where are the new Leicas made?

Weren't they made by Leupold until recently??

The old Leicas were made by Leupold, with lenses provided by Leica. The new Leica riflescopes are made in Germany.

John, one more question,

I wonder who makes the lenses on those new Leupold VX7 scopes?

This is where the confusion lies, not all Asian optics have dove into the world of tactical/hunting rifle scopes to the same degree as S&B,NF,Zeiss,Swaro, etc and others, but when you speak of optics solely (binos and spotting scopes), theres lots of companies that are running amazing optical products for birding and other outdoor activities that arent oriented solely for hunting.

I don't now, but my guess would be Japan.

I have respectfully asked you and Matt to provide details of your head to head comparisons and have yet to see a thing. Its funny, there are guys here who disagree with my in the field comparisons and observations yet wont post up any comparisons of their own. It seems as if they are just content to discount a product that they have no in the field knowledge of and will post others impressions of Vortex as gospel

Drummond

PS Elk tags are easy to come by, get one and we'll chat

Dammit...got pulled back into this thread.

I'd like that Drummond.

It's beautiful weather, I think I'll go to the range and see if anyone has purchased a Vortex Razor yet. I'll bring my scope and hopefully do side by side comparison and a resolution contest against the Vortex.

jim62 - Hold your nose, close yer yap and blow it our your _ _ _.

Like I said..

GFYS.

While you're out there, check out how many diehard benchrest guys use the Kowa Prominar 883/884, or 773/774, using Asian glass, regarded as the best spotter in the world, bar none as compared to all the very best euro stuff available.

Naw.. WTF do benchrest shooters know?

Most of them would rather use a Jap Made Weaver 36x "T" model or an Old Jap Bausch and Lomb 36x on their match rifle than a German or Austrian scope..(and they do!)

Not too many of the "Superior" Kraut scopes in the Winner cicles of US Bench rest matches.

Just think about it..all those WORLD RECORD groups being shot with "second rate" optics on them.. Hard to believe it.

You can seriously compare Benchrest with hunting. They shoot groups, but wgaf where on the target the group is? NO ONE.

::::sound of crickets chirping::::

Drummond claps jim on the back in consolation "You'll get 'em next time jimbo, but that's a damn fine group on that fence post."





Say jim?

GFYS

This ain't benchrest country, but if it was I'd sure check, yessir I shore would.

Moral to the story......

Kowa Prominar=Asian glass=best in the world,period.

Don't say it can't be done, as it already has.

No, JG, it's not the best glass in the world. I'll take your word for that its the best spotter in the world. Just how big is it? Is it small enough to pack around and spot game animals several miles away? I don't know why I'm asking; I never use a spotting scope, and even if I decided I wanted to, finances won't allow. I blew my slush fund on my Hensoldt scope and getting ready for turkey season. I stand corrected, though I never discussed spotters. But, they are sporting optics, so the japs take Gold in one event.

I looked at them on the SWFA site, and they're not cheap, but they cost honestly 1/2 what I expected. Any idea why SWFA is charging roughly 1/2 for one of two identically-named 880 models?

How high does that 72mm objective Hensoldt need to be mounted and is it possible to get a cheekweld with it?

John,

Have you gotten your hands on a Zeiss Victory Diavari? Since you have tested the new S&B Summit and Leica, your opinion and evaluation would be most interesting.

I'm not sure how high the rings are. I purchased a Near Mfg. Alpha Mount that is basically one solid bottom cradle and 3 ring caps. I have an adjustable cheek piece and I can get a cheek weld and can still raise the cheekpiece higher.

Going to get one soon to test.

MD,

Do you know what the differences are between the Zeiss Victory scopes and the Hensoldt scopes? They look a little different (I think it's the turrets). Other than that, and extra $$$, what are the differences?

Shouldn't you know since you just spent close to $4,000 on one?

Bein' a little cheeky ain�tcha?

It's difficult getting any information about Hensoldt�period, much less the differences between the Hensoldt and their Zeiss counterpart. In Germany, Hensoldt and Zeiss are two divisions of the Zeiss Group. Zeiss makes other things, such as 75K microscopes like the one my wife and her grad students use every day. The importer is a one-man show and he never answers the phone or returns messages. I will continue trying to get in touch with him. Zeiss USA doesn't have anyone on this side of the pond that knows.

What I DO know is since Hensoldts are primarily constructed for military use,all Hensoldts MUST be held to the [color:#3333FF][u]MIL-STD-810E standard[/u][/color] whereas Zeiss doesn't. I linked the Mil-STD if you cared to look; I didn�t.

Hey Jim, you should get an elk tag too and come out!

Guessing you don't have the first clue about Military Standards, how they work and how they can be applied in part.

It would be easy enough to read the document and answer those questions if I felt like it. Your "guess" is correct by the way.

I have both and compared them to conquest thats the same money about anyway.

Curious here...why would, or should, I have any knowledge regarding Military Standards, how they work and how they can be applied in part? Really, what reason would I have to have that particular knowledge?

Because you brought them up in an attempt, I suppose, to somehow show the superiority of Hensoldt scopes.
That MilSpec may or may not assure a superior product, you have no idea as you have admitted.

Milspec is a stringent standard, requiring documentation of manufacture and assembly all the way back to the raw materials.

Or at least this was true with the aeronautical mil-spec stuff I have experience with (when I worked for an aircraft maker).

If, for example, the shipping invoice for an item or raw material is lost, that item is now DQ'd from being mil-spec and in fact, the company can no longer even keep the non-documented material around!! I have a roll of very expensive, very nice kevlar rope that was DQ'd in this manner and given to me by the company. Perfectly good rope, but without the documentation trail all the way back, it cannot be used and still have the end result be mil-spec.

The whole idea of mil-spec is stringent design, backed up by stringent testing, and followed by stringent manufacturing. All of the above are almost always FAR in excess of what a non-milspec item will be subject to, simply because the cost of achieving and maintaining mil-spec status precludes "casually" making stuff that way.

Just my opinion, and as I said, based on mil-spec stuff I've worked with in the aero field.

Carry on with the pissin' match.

The Hensoldts are a superior product. I finally got in touch with the gentleman who imports the Hensoldt line. The similarities are the glass used in the lenses, the general scope tube and that's about it. Hensoldt has different coatings that are able to withstand abrasion better than the sporting line, the erector system is completely different. It's stronger; it has two coiled springs whereas the Sporting version has one spring. The Hensoldt has more travel in the erector system. The illumination is controlled by a micro-processor which is an improvement over the Zeiss illumination in some way. He was reeling things off so fast I just stopped asking questions and listened. He noted it's much easier to list what they have in common because it's a very short list. Good enough for me. Now I've admitted the Mil-Spec scope is superior to its sporting version in this case.

And you believe him (grin). Man did I read right that thing has a 72mm objective wouldn't be caught in red neck country(here) with something like that. One other thing comes to mind no two Magnumdood how old are you, mid life thing maybe the other I'll not go there.

Best Alan PS. remember that sense of humor OK.

We need to lighten this place up!

I know exactly what Milspec means having been the Quality Assurance Manager for mid sized aerospace machine shop for many years.
The point I was trying to make was that there are Milspecs for a thousand different things and while the chain of custody requirements and record keeping for the item is incredibly strict the actual part produced may be no different structurally or mechanically than another non Milspec item.

I'm happy that Magnumdood is so proud of his 72mm Hensoldt but like you I wouldn't be caught dead with a monstrosity like that anywhere near me or my rifles.
Just my opinion and I'm entitled to it.

Maybe you wouldn't. I learn something new every day; Canada claims a redneck area. I was born in Texas, grew up in Texas and served as Deputy Sheriff for 17 years in central Texas. It wouldm't bother me a bit to pull my rifle out with my Hensoldt on it in a Texas deer camp. I'm pretty sure Texas rednecks are more ingrained in the redneck culture than Canadian rednecks.

How tall of rings does one have to run in order to clear a 72mm objective? 2" or so?

Yes you are, no matter how asinine it is.

Dood, where in TX are you from? I was raised in the hill country

Or not!

Dood now lets not get going on who has the best rednecks remember I'm in Alberta and we don't look on redecks as being a bad thing. And Dood I am glad you learnt something new about Canada we really are OK mostly.

Best Alan ; But we do have the better rednecks the hard working kind not them nuts kind.(;

I was Deputy in the Bryan/College Station area. I was fortunate enough to be invited on several hunts in the Hill Country. I lived in College Station from 1978 to 2000. Before that I lived in LaPorte while in K-12 school.

I SO enjoyed those Hill Country hunts. We were in Burnette Co on a huge lease. The country up around there is hard to beat.

It MAY be no different. Or, it might be different. That's kind of the point of milspec. A part or assembly made to milspec is a known quantity. The other part or assembly is not.

You imbue an inanimate object with sentience and swear it'll never get near your rifles. What�s it going to do? Mount itself? Then people might what? Laugh at you? Weak. What's it going to do to you? You said you wouldn't let that monstrosity near you or your rifles. Really. What would it do to you? Really weak.

No, the ring is 0.7215" from the bottom of the ring to the scope tube. It could even be shorter; there's still a 0.15" gap between the scope bell and the barrel. While it is quite a bit bigger than a 56mm scope, you only need an additional 0.35" in the heigth of the ring that is used for mounting the 56mm scope .

Two things:

• What would happen if you were caught in the redneck woods with my scope mounted on your rifle?
• You mentioned mid-life and someplace you said, "I won't go there." Go there. What were you talking about?

I can't help myself-

Holy Crap; what have we got going on here -a Redneck pissing match to compare how far we can eject it and how big the ejector is.

Magnumdood-- until you stated the above dates of where you lived and I then realized you were probably older than 50, - before that I guessed you to probably be in you 20's since you act like an immature teenager

llama2, by exhibiting such poor impulse control, E.g.:
you appear to be the immature one.

llama2, save your breath, he's from Obamaland aka OZ.

Probably doesn't even own any Vortex products.

Obamaland? Hardly.

You are correct about one thing (finally); I don't own any Vortex products. If I shoot near someone who has one, when they ask to look at my gear, I'll peak through theirs. Drummond is going to try and convert me, but I'm skeptical.

Ummm......where exactly did I "imbue an inanimate object with sentience"?

If you were weakly referring to me calling your monstrous scope a monstrosity perhaps you better check the definition of monstrosity!

Here, I'll help you.

English, Noun, Singular

monstrosity (plural monstrosities)

A monstrous thing, person or act.

Magnumdood,

No, I wouldn't be caught dead with that monstrous scope of yours on any of my rifles.

Having to explain why I needed a 2.5 pound scope, with less elevation adjustment range, and far less windage adjustment range than any number of common scopes, an objective so big it needed 3/4" high rings to mount, and which cost over $3.7K would become tiresome and more than a little embarrassing. Particularly since shooting hours here are 1/2 hour before sunrise to 1/2 hour after sunset.

Hey, I'm glad it works for you, you may enjoy telling everyone how much your monstrous scope cost.

Magnum, did you look at the specs before you plunked down your $3.8K?

Detailed Specification Review
Magnification Range: 6X to 24X
Objective Lens Diameter: 72 mm
Parallax Compensation Adj: 50 m. - infinity
Exterior Finish: matte black
Exit Pupil Range: 12.0 mm to 3.0 mm
Field of View @ 6X: 61 m. @ 1000 m.
Field of View @ 24X: 17 m. @ 1000 m.
Eye Relief: 3.54 - 4.33 inches
Impact Point Corr. Per Click: .1 mrad (1 cm @ 100 m.)
Elevation Adjustment: 200 cm @ 100 m. Which equals 78.7" total
Windage Adjustment: 60 cm @ 100 m. Which equals 23.6" total
Length / Weight: 14.96" / 38.8 oz.
Tube Diameter: 34 mm
Weather Resistance: Waterproof & Fogproof
Warranty: Zeiss Optronics Lifetime

These are the specs of the monstrous Hensoldt that Magnumdood is so very proud of.

Note the relatively small elevation adjustment and the truly tiny windage adjustment.
To put those numbers into perspective the Leupold VX-3 1.5-5x20 has ~120" of both elevation and windage adjustment all while being housed in a 1" tube!

Keep in mind that this scope costs $3,771!!!!!!

Like I said, I'm glad you're happy.

Good lord people, sound like [bleep] pre-school in the optics forum these days.

The Henny that 'dude has, I'm sure, is a fine optical instrument.
I had the Diavari version of same and can tell you that there aint a scope Ive owned or looked through that equals it in low to no light...sans NV of course.

IMO, it is a mission-specific optic and does not fit the need of everyone's style of hunting.

The consensus on this board is usually small, light-weight and low to moderate magnification. If the Leupy option blows up your skirt, thats wonderful. Keep buying them. They work for the majority of daylight, legal hunting.

So [bleep] what if legal hours are 30/30 for game animals...there's lots to do at night. If you arent blasting night critters, you are missing half the fun.

Sleep when you're dead.....

Back to the Vortex hype thingy....

You must mean pre-school like using cleverly spelled obscenities in your posts.
This pre-schooler doesn't do that.

Magnum claims his Hensoldt has more erector travel than another scope, I provide the specs and they state that there is LESS adjustment range in his 34MM tube than that which is available in a much less expensive scope with a mere 1" tube. There is VASTLY LESS windage adjustment in his Hensoldt!
I never claimed the optic were anything less than superlative.

M-dood- Apparently I gave you a higher age bracket (teenager) than deserved when evaluating your behavior. By your comeback response to me and others -you exhibit more the actions of a grade schooler. ie: "you are a________"; "no, you are a ______"

Are you really this stupid, or is it an act? When I began posting about my Hensoldt in this thread I�ve been comparing the Hensoldt 6-24x72 to the Zeiss 6-24x72. If you try and deny that then you�re just a plain liar and a poor one at that. At no less than two, possibly 3 or more posts, I reference comparing the Hensoldt to the Zeiss. So, now I�ll write slow so you can follow along. I was listing the differences between the Hensoldt and the Zeiss when I noted, among other things, more elevation travel in the Hensoldt when compared to the Zeiss.

The Hensoldt 6-24x72, just as the S&B 5-25x56, are Tactical scopes meant for long range engagement of whatever needs to be shot. They both are also designed to be mounted on a picatinney rail with 45 MOA of forward cant. That greatly increases the amount of available elevation because I have to essentially bottom out the erector to get a 100 yards zero. My Hensoldt has a Mil-dot scope with known mil-distances (besides 1 mil) built into the reticle. I don�t need the windage turret when I can use the reticle to hold off any wind value.

Dumb [bleep].

Your $3.8K scope has LESS elevation adjustment than a 1.5-5x20 VX-3 which can also be mounted on the same rail your $3.8K monstrosity is mounted on!

Except alot lower!

Less than the 3.5-10x40 LR/T Tactical too.

As a matter of fact your $3.8K monstrosity has less than 4 of the 5 Burris Xtreme Tactical scopes.

All of these can be mounted on the same rail that your $3.8K monstrosity is mounted on too.

Except alot lower!

Now, compensation is a psychological reality, and it appears you may in fact be exhibiting signs of that reality. Sorry to hear that.

Hey, I'm glad you like your scope.

I didn't need to use a single obscenity either.

Another thing, putting any scope on any Picatinny (note proper spelling and capitalization) rail, no matter the amount of forward cant, does exactly NOTHING to increase the amount of elevation adjustment a scope has.

No question, the optical performance of your scope is superlative.

I merely stated that I wouldn't ever be caught dead with one on my rifles and you get all angry like I just slapped your kid.

Isn't Chicago in Illinois?
Illinois =s Obama

LMAO!

There it is; the mark of the truly desperate and angry, correction of spelling and/or grammar.

With all else being equal, higher power scopes will have less elevation travel. Comparing a 6-24X to lower powered scopes is a meaningless apples to oranges comparison that shows bias or ignorance.

Leupold's closest, the 8.5-25 ERT (Leupold's most expensive BTW), has less elevation travel than my Hensoldt. Windage travel is meaningless as the Hensoldt has more than enough, and with a square adjustment range it won't lose elevation travel if you use it. With the Leupold, if you crank in any windage you have less elevation travel which is what you're most likely to run out of.

Even that isn't close to apples to apples yet as with the Leupold you're stuck with the stupid 3X erector meaning at low power the FOV is about the same as a fixed 10X scope which makes it much less versatile than a good 6-24X.

Touch�, you are correct. I thought you meant ideologically.

Comprehension is not your strong point...

Dood wrote "(utilizing a canted base)increases the amount of AVAILABLE elevation" which means the elevation is already there, lets use more of it by canting the base.

Why you insist on comparing the 1.5 Leupold to the big Zeiss is entertaining to say the least.

I understand completely the idea of using a forward canted base to get more usable travel. Put ANY scope on a canted base and you get to use more of its travel.
The point isn't the base or anything to do with the base it is about total elevation adjustment in the scope. If one scope has more it will still have more no matter what the base!
Pretty easy really.

Apparently comprehension isn't your strong point!

Some scopes have an absurd amount of "up", but that doesn't make them better, for practical purposes. It's only significant if it has utility.

I use an elevation-challenged scope (Zeiss Conquest 6.5-20) for long range shooting. No canted base, and I can get out to 1000 yds or more, with a lowly 300 Win no less.

Not really taking sides here; this is kind of a silly argument. I mean c'mon guys, at least argue something meaningful. Like 7-08 vs. .308.

In general this is true but there are some scopes with similar high magnification that have more elevation and windage adjustment than the Hensoldt.

One being the Leupold 8.5-25x50 VX-3 with 94" of each.

Magnum, you never claimed that your Hensoldt had the most adjustment and I'm sure it is a magnificent piece of machinery for it's intended purpose.

Laffin' whilst watching you chase your tail.

Laughing while watching you fail to comprehend.

Wow- this sucker is still going strong??!!

This one is rivaling some of the more pungent Leupy threads!!

So I guess you didnt type this?



Your credibility is nill.

And to help you visualize a similar scope to 'Dood's:

The big Zeiss mounted. Rings height 1.25"

Thats a great looking out fit!

dave

Karsten cheek piece just like I have, but I have a Near Mfg. Alpha Mount for the scope. I'll have to take a partial pic todaY. My bolt is off being Teflon coated at Black Ice.

Yeah looks like a real practical hunting rifle.......

For shooting natives at night in South Philly.

My rifle wouldn't be considered a practical hunting rifle by any standard on this forum no matter what scope/sight was placed on it anyway. I may even lose sleep....naaaaaah.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Yep, it looks just as ridiculous as I thought.

So you think fugly is an obscenity?

I don't happen to think so but you may if you please.

BTW nil has 1 L not 2.

If the rings in the picture RHutch posted are 1.25" tall how do you fit yours in rings only .7215" high?
And you say you could fit them in rings only .5715 tall?

It is a shame the brown spot on the mattress, the night you were conceived, was never recovered...you may have been something.

Continue to nitpick, use spell-check and post your meaningless drivel.

It is practical for the intended purpose.

What exactly is a South Philly native?

You're a real class act Hutch!

Have a good day.

Thanks for the kind words

Anytime!

The ONLY thing you contribute to this forum as far as I can see is the correction of others spelling and/or grammar. You have zero comprehension of what I told you. Did it ever occur to you to read what I wrote? Did it occur to you he is measuring his rings wrong? You can see spelling errors, but that's all you can see, or comprehend.

Thanks for the kind words.

Have a good day.

Anytime.