Vortex Scopes and Red Dots?

[22/45 Fan]

Where does Vortex fit into the spectrum of quality and reliability for their scopes and red dots?

Upper crust like Leupold, Zeiss, Swarovski, NightForce, etc?

Low level like BSA, Simmons, Tasco?

Mid-range but good like Nikon, Bushnell, Weaver, Burris?

I would like to get a sampling of opinions and experiences.

 

[9x19]

Depends on which line of Vortex optics you are talking about... their products cover a wide range of quality/features.

 

[Big Old Boy]

I have both the crossfire and diamond back pluse a venom red dot like them all.

 

[Busterswoodshop]

There red dots are just as good as any other Chinese made red dot.

 

[rugerjunkie]

I have Diamondback HP's and Viper HS scopes and I think they are awesome scopes. The Viper 6.5-20's that I have on varmint rigs have absolute repeatability in the turrets and Id say as clear as any scopes Ive used. These would be in what you could call Vortex' mid grade lines and Id put them up against most others high end scopes.

I also have higher end Weaver , Leupold , and burris scopes. Im finding the Vortex every bit as good or better than some I paid a lot more money for. Although I dont have any Nightforce or Swarovski's etc. I would make an educated assumption from what Ive seen that the high dollar Vortex scopes would give them a run for their money too. Optics have got to be at a point where how much better can we get right now. And how much are you willing to pay for a name? Some scope manufacturers better sharpen their pencils and up their game or I see some going by the wayside.

Another bonus is Vortex is building/has built a huge complex right in Wisconsin USA!

 

[Nomosendero]

Depends on which line of Vortex optics you are talking about... their products cover a wide range of quality/features.

That's right, like other brands.

I can only speak of the PST/HST from personal experience, they don't have Nightforce glass, "Razor is closer" but they are quite good and to get better adjustments you will need to spend alot more.

 

[gtxmonte]

Vortex ranges from cheap to very good, just about like any other scope company. Even Nightforce has a lower cost line now

Vortex is good for the money spent. Burris has some very good and some very cheap. I really like Sightron scopes myself. I have 6 or 7 of the SIIIs. Really good glass.

This likely won't be popular...........but MOST overrated based on what you pay? Leupold, hands down, not even close

 

[22/45 Fan]

Depends on which line of Vortex optics you are talking about... their products cover a wide range of quality/features.

OK, that's fair. Bushnell and Weaver do to and I guess I want to know about the upper level ones.

As to Leupold being overpriced, perhaps so but the government and military seem to like them.

 

[Nomosendero]

Depends on which line of Vortex optics you are talking about... their products cover a wide range of quality/features.

OK, that's fair. Bushnell and Weaver do to and I guess I want to know about the upper level ones.

As to Leupold being overpriced, perhaps so but the government and military seem to like them.

I wish we could go by that, lots of politics, at least until now, we will see!!

 

[winman1550]

I have to agree on the Leupolds being over rated. Say something bad about them and all you hear about is--lifetime guarantee, made in the USA, greatest since sliced bread. From my experience it's good they have a lifetime guarantee. I bought and sent back 3 scopes of the same model for not being able to sight in do to faulty crosshairs. They sent me a 4th scope and my money back for my troubles and I promptly sold it without opening the box! Best scope I've ever had was a made in Phillapines first Gen. Simmons Aetec. Mines been on everything from a 375 H&H to a 22 Mag. and never a problem of any kind and the glass is clear as a bell.

 

[steelshooterco]

Vortex scopes can cover extremes of the range, they have 2 1-6X AR scopes.

The lower cost one, SE-1624-1 even has an illuminated recticle, and runs as low as $280.

The more expensive one, which may be seeing military use is the RZR-16005 and its 2 other versions, these run $1,400 on the low end.

A company that provides various optics parts to the military and then has its products eventually trickle into the civilian market makes a specific mount for the RZR version.

 

[taxed2death]

I don't own any Vortex scopes, but I have played with a few of them now in a variety of light conditions, and have a good idea of how they perform. I would place them in the intermediate category so far as quality goes, which is not meant to damn them with faint praise. This is a pretty broad category in which a LOT of manufacturers fall. Definitely better than BSA, Simmons, Bushnell, and similar lines. I don't think they are as bright under low light as standard Burris or entry level Leupolds, but otherwise the quality seems along the same lines. The Burris Extreme Tactical line is really more in the upper levels of quality and is comparable to the high-end Leupold scopes, so I do need to differentiate on that aspect. The Vortex does seem to hold a zero well, have fairly precise movement when adjusted, and is able to hold up to some rough handling, so those are all very important pluses. A few people I know have these mounted on AR platform rifles in calibers from 5.56, to .308, to .458 SOCOM, and no problems with any that I know of, and I know of one mounted on a H&R Handy Rifle in 45/70 where the owner is using pretty hot loads and it hasn't come apart, so they don't seem to be sensitive to recoil. From this, I would say that they seem to be a pretty solid performer, especially for the price point.

To the comments that they are comparable to Nightforce, Zeiss, high-end Leupold, and similar...not even close!! If you want to really see the difference in how your optics perform. go out in the woods on a moonlit night and see how far into the shadows you can penetrate. Stay in your blind until full dark and see how many extra shooting minutes you can get from the higher quality glass. See how absolutely precise and repeatable your adjustments can be with the higher quality scope. I've done numerous side by side comparisons of this sort, and there IS a difference between premium scopes and intermediate scopes. Is it worth paying 2x-3x as much? That's your call. I hunt pigs at night a lot and have other uses where low-light performance is critical, so for me the answer is "yes". I also have personally experienced that sinking feeling when, as you sit in your perfectly placed blind in that dark hollow where even at full noon you are in the shadows, when that monster buck walks out just as legal shooting time is ticking away, and you can't see your crosshairs well enough to justify a shot. That particular deer still haunts me, and that was the moment when I made the decision to invest only in quality glass from then on. With Zeiss, Nightforce, high-end Burris, Nikon or Leupold scopes, this is not a problem. I guess it just depends on what you expect from your scope. If you plan to shoot only in decent light, then Vortex and similar value-priced scopes are definitely an option. If you want to extend your shooting time to include those critical 5-10 minutes in the early morning or late evening, or in low-light conditions when you may not want to use a light, you may want to spring for a bit more scope.

 

[pleadthe2nd]

I have 4 of teir red dot sights 2 venoms, a viper and the sparc 2 on my ar556. I have found that the quality of these sights to be very good, and would recommend them to aanyone thinking about purchasing them , the price is right aand a no questions asked lifetime warranty, how can you go wrong, true they are made in China, but you wouldn't know it if they didn't tell you. I don't have any experience with their scopes, but do have the diamondback binoculars which has very clear glass. You might say I'm sold on Vortex.

 

[gtxmonte]

I don't own any Vortex scopes, but I have played with a few of them now in a variety of light conditions, and have a good idea of how they perform. I would place them in the intermediate category so far as quality goes, which is not meant to damn them with faint praise. This is a pretty broad category in which a LOT of manufacturers fall. Definitely better than BSA, Simmons, Bushnell, and similar lines. I don't think they are as bright under low light as standard Burris or entry level Leupolds, but otherwise the quality seems along the same lines. The Burris Extreme Tactical line is really more in the upper levels of quality and is comparable to the high-end Leupold scopes, so I do need to differentiate on that aspect. The Vortex does seem to hold a zero well, have fairly precise movement when adjusted, and is able to hold up to some rough handling, so those are all very important pluses. A few people I know have these mounted on AR platform rifles in calibers from 5.56, to .308, to .458 SOCOM, and no problems with any that I know of, and I know of one mounted on a H&R Handy Rifle in 45/70 where the owner is using pretty hot loads and it hasn't come apart, so they don't seem to be sensitive to recoil. From this, I would say that they seem to be a pretty solid performer, especially for the price point.

To the comments that they are comparable to Nightforce, Zeiss, high-end Leupold, and similar...not even close!! If you want to really see the difference in how your optics perform. go out in the woods on a moonlit night and see how far into the shadows you can penetrate. Stay in your blind until full dark and see how many extra shooting minutes you can get from the higher quality glass. See how absolutely precise and repeatable your adjustments can be with the higher quality scope. I've done numerous side by side comparisons of this sort, and there IS a difference between premium scopes and intermediate scopes. Is it worth paying 2x-3x as much? That's your call. I hunt pigs at night a lot and have other uses where low-light performance is critical, so for me the answer is "yes". I also have personally experienced that sinking feeling when, as you sit in your perfectly placed blind in that dark hollow where even at full noon you are in the shadows, when that monster buck walks out just as legal shooting time is ticking away, and you can't see your crosshairs well enough to justify a shot. That particular deer still haunts me, and that was the moment when I made the decision to invest only in quality glass from then on. With Zeiss, Nightforce, high-end Burris, Nikon or Leupold scopes, this is not a problem. I guess it just depends on what you expect from your scope. If you plan to shoot only in decent light, then Vortex and similar value-priced scopes are definitely an option. If you want to extend your shooting time to include those critical 5-10 minutes in the early morning or late evening, or in low-light conditions when you may not want to use a light, you may want to spring for a bit more scope.

So you are implying that a $2500 Vortex razor is an intermediate scope, that is slightly better than a BSA or Bushnell but not as good as a standard Burris or entry level Leupold............Alrighty then.

I love it when people give all this technical insight on products they don't own

 

[Major T]

I do not use Leupolds exclusively, but I do have a bunch. None of mine have been back for repairs yet.

Lots of folks make decent to good scopes these days. The top products in most lines are good enough that it takes a lot of doing (read money) to separate them from the field.

Folks who are using Japaneese makers are putting out some good products.

 

[goldeneagle1976]

Experience with Vortex Viper PST and Razor HD...by no means is the Razor an intermediate scope. It is absolutely on par with Leupold, Nightforce and as far as glass alone, not too far off S & B. It is packed with features and pretty much the only con you will see about it online is its weight.
The PST is on par with most upper mid-range scopes from those manufacturers too. Vortex packs in features and also has one of the best warranties in the business. They have brought a lot to the table and have made other manufacturers up their game. And no, this was not a paid advertisement I just really like Vortex.

 

[don44]

Experience with Vortex Viper PST and Razor HD...by no means is the Razor an intermediate scope. It is absolutely on par with Leupold, Nightforce and as far as glass alone, not too far off S & B. It is packed with features and pretty much the only con you will see about it online is its weight.
The PST is on par with most upper mid-range scopes from those manufacturers too. Vortex packs in features and also has one of the best warranties in the business. They have brought a lot to the table and have made other manufacturers up their game. And no, this was not a paid advertisement I just really like Vortex.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What he said!

 

[gtxmonte]

Vortex is like most other scope companies. The Razor HD AMG costs $3700 and the Crossfire costs you $150. So they make great scopes and they make cheap scopes. Burris makes the XTR which is a $1200 scope and they make $30 rimfire scopes. As stated before, even Nightforce is making a lower cost scope line now, with their SHV series. That's still an $800 scope, but you CAN'T compare it to a $4500 Nightforce Beast. One thing that has not changed with optics, regardless of brand, is that you get what you pay for. You will NOT get $1000 optic quality in a $200 scope. Its just NOT going to happen and a cheap scope, is a cheap scope, whatever the name on the side is. Certain brands do seem to bring more for the money in their lower cost scope lines and Vortex does qualify in those areas. Its all about lens quality. You take a basic $200 AO scope, or you have a $200 scope with lighted reticles, side parallax and some other bells and whistles. The basic $200 scope will have better optics every time, because the bells and whistles are where the money is spent on the other scope. Nothing is free

I like Vortex, have a couple Vipers, but they are not my first choice and that's only for ONE reason. They are a little light on magnification for what I do. Until the release of their new F class Golden eagle scope, I don't think they had anything over 24X. I have a minimum of 32X magnification on most of my longer range stuff. 50X on the stuff I shoot at 1000 yards or longer

 

[gatorhugger]

One thing that never changes is the man that buys a $1500 scope cannot ever be convinced a cheaper scope is just as good. Nobody is ever going to admit they paid too much. As far as the old saying that
you get what you pay for, well yes you get something when you pay for it, that is when UPS doesn't lose it. Does that also mean every scope is priced fairly in relation to other competitor's build quality and price? Not always. It used to be a fairly safe bet that spending more equals a better build but I have found in the last decade that to be a fading old fashioned notion. With Robots and computer ground Asian glass, the idea of a Leupold being better than a Burris or Weaver is long gone. It may not even be better than a Simmons, it just depends on the date the Simmons was made and in what factory. At one point some Simmons were built in the same Philippine plant that Nikon's and Burris was made at. Same glass, same scope, with a different name slapped on it.

Leaving aside top end military scopes the fact is great glass and great glass is pretty much common place today. In the 60's and 70's it was a big deal to have a one piece aluminum tube, multi sealed gas inside, fine clarity glass, fully coated optics, and repeatable shots. Unless you are the type to go out playing with Turrets every shot, just about every scope from a Cabelas catalog does all of the above. Is Burris better than Weaver? on some scopes. Are grand slams that grand? On some scopes. I have seen Grand slams that were no better than a Dennys's grand slam breakfast. I have a Simmons expedition that cost $200 new and has the brightest clearest glass equaling anything ever produced by Nikon? True. But it weighs a ton, and I can find just as good Chinese ones today at half the price of a Comparable Nikon.
So are Chinese scopes still inferior to Japan scopes or German scopes? Nope, that is history.
So I would say you do get what you pay for, but you might be able to pay a lot less than the marketing reps want you to believe.
You just have to do some work and look through a lot of scopes and research their build history.

 

[gtxmonte]

ANY scope looks clear and bright in the store under fluorescent lights, looking at something a couple hundred feet away. Take that $1500 scope outside and look at something 1000 yards away, as compared to that $200 scope on the same power and get back to us.

At 100 yards, you are likely correct.........anything that will reliably track will get the job done in decent light. But low light and long range.........well, cheap is cheap and the difference is quite obvious.

I do have, or have had about any brand scope you care to name. I have had, or currently do have scopes that range in price from 100 bucks to $3500. Comparing a cheap 8-32 Mueller, an 8-32 Nikko Sterling, BSA or whatever other cheaper make you want to something along the lines of an SIII Sightron, Vortex, Nightforce, Leupold in similar price ranges is laughable. The clarity of the better scopes at long ranges, at higher powers is EASY to see. I do have some cheaper scopes, but they are all on rimfires that will never see more than 200 yard shots, tops. Anything I shoot at distance has good glass, because I actually like to SEE what I am shooting at

If a lower cost scope had good enough glass to be clear on my 1000 yard rigs, I would damn sure be shooting them, because that would mean substantially lower cost rigs and that's always a good thing. I don't buy scopes that look cool, or because that's what the "other" guys have. I buy scopes that work