Vortex spitfire 3x

I have one on my Tavor. I like the reticle. Wasn't sure if I made the decision over the Burris 332. The 332 has a nice thicker circle for close shooting and is easier to see when not illuminated over the Spitfire. The 332 also comes with a sunshade. I chose the Spitfire and glad I did for 4 reasons over the 332.

1. The reticle although smaller lines than the 332 seem harder to find when not illuminated, do provide finer aiming for accuracy.
2. The reticle bullet drop markings in the reticle are easier to see over the 332.
3. The eye relief is very forgiving and easy to point shoot in close distance which makes it ideal in such applications like IPSC.
4. Lifetime no BS Warranty can't be beat.

Moe
 
Agree somewhat with the busy reticle, for almost all light conditions you are likely to shoot in it doesn't need to be illuminated which means the etched reticle doesn't look as busy. Will say the drop compensator is bang on for the 100-200-300m graduations.
 
I have both of them. My advice - go for the 332.
Also if you buy 332 before Dec 31 you get free Fastfire3 (over $400 value), link to claim form is in the forum.
Cheers
 
icabod123 said:
I considered it, but I don't like the 332 reticle. What do you like about the 332 over the spitfire?
Click to expand...
It does not matter how you twist it, x3 reticle is a pure CQB . And 332 reticle is way easier to find quickly.
Up to 200 yds you don't have to use any drop comp. and if you are shooting a lot over 200yds should be looking at different scope.
 
That's a good point - I don't shoot more than 200 yards. Maybe I will look at the 332 again. I read some reviews of canted reticles and locking nuts shearing off - are those overblown or earlier versions of the optic?
 
They come with lifetime warranty. I think the problematic ones were the first one manufactured few years back.
Cheers
 
I got the spitfire 3x and man am I impressed. I watched a video review that said you have to see the reticle outdoors to get an appreciation of the glass and reticle clarity. He was right - the glass is clear and the reticle is crisp. It doesn't look too small or too busy when there is sufficient light coming into the tube.
 
Had both. Preferred the 332, as the Vortex seemed to block peripheral vision a lot more, if that makes any sense. It was more like looking down a thick-walled pipe. 332 was like looking down a thinner-walled pipe. Best way I can describe it. Both are perfectly good optics though, and both functioned well.
 
I shopped around for both and ended up getting the spitfire. It's less bulky and you can remove the mount's riser, which was necessary for the MR1 I use it on. I have no complaints about the sight and it's worth the money, but it's not going to compare to the 1000 dollar options. I found the illumination to be sufficient. The lens caps were junk and I did away with them right away. It has held zero and if yours doesn't, there's always the excellent vortex warranty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom